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


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: (view raw or whole 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 - individual and corporate NNTP services

In response to


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 © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group