Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: GIST and TOAST

From: Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews(at)supernews(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: GIST and TOAST
Date: 2007-03-02 19:28:44
Message-ID: slrneugunb.2tne.andrew+nonews@atlantis.supernews.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2007-03-02, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews(at)supernews(dot)com> writes:
>> On 2007-03-02, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I think these are actual bugs. If you happened to provide a large enough
>>> datum
>>> to the gist code it would cause the same problem I'm seeing. The packed
>>> varlena patch just makes it easier to trigger.
>
>> Are you taking into account the fact that, at least prior to your patch,
>> values in index tuples could never be toasted?
>
> False --- see index_form_tuple().

My mistake.

A closer reading, however, shows that at least for cases like intarray,
btree_gist, etc., the detoasting of an index value is being done in the
gist decompress function, so the value seen via GISTENTRY in the other
functions should already have been detoasted once.

-- 
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Zoltan BoszormenyiDate: 2007-03-02 19:55:25
Subject: Re: Final version of IDENTITY/GENERATED patch
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2007-03-02 19:17:46
Subject: Re: UPSERT

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group