| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Minmax indexes |
| Date: | 2013-09-26 17:40:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20130926174043.GZ4832@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Erik Rijkers wrote:
> I have the impression it's not quite working correctly.
>
> The attached program returns different results for different values of enable_bitmapscan (consistently).
Clearly there's some bug somewhere. I'll investigate it more.
> ( Btw, I had to make the max_locks_per_transaction higher for even not-so-large tables -- is that expected? For a 100M row
> table, max_locks_per_transaction=1024 was not enough; I set it to 2048. Might be worth some documentation, eventually. )
Not documentation -- that would also be a bug which needs to be fixed.
Thanks for testing.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2013-09-26 18:45:21 | Re: dynamic shared memory |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-09-26 17:39:07 | Re: Minmax indexes |