From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Jeff Hoffmann <jeff(at)remapcorp(dot)com>, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] has anybody else used r-tree indexes in 6.5? |
Date: | 1999-06-19 02:57:24 |
Message-ID: | 10003.929761044@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> date: 1999/05/31 19:32:47; author: tgl; state: Exp; lines: +61 -5
> Generate a more specific error message when an operator used
> in an index doesn't have a restriction selectivity estimator.
> Tom, was there anything more here than the new elog error exit itself?
> It used to ignore the missing estimator, or fail farther in to the
> code?
That code useta look something like
fmgr(get_oprrest(operatorOID), ...)
so that if get_oprrest returned 0 you'd get an error message along the
lines of "fmgr: no function cache entry for OID 0". This was pretty
unhelpful, of course, and someone complained about it a few weeks ago;
so I added a test for missing oprrest. That wasn't what broke things
... what broke things was my removal of seemingly bogus oprrest links
from pg_operator, which I think I did on 4/10:
revision 1.56
date: 1999/04/10 23:53:00; author: tgl; state: Exp; lines: +99 -99
Fix another batch of bogosities in pg_operator table.
These were bogus selectivity-estimator links, like a '>' operator
pointing to intltsel when it should use intgtsel.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-06-19 03:11:50 | Re: [HACKERS] has anybody else used r-tree indexes in 6.5? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-06-19 02:55:33 | Re: [HACKERS] has anybody else used r-tree indexes in 6.5? |