| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical indexes using BRIN broken since pg10 |
| Date: | 2019-11-15 03:07:15 |
| Message-ID: | 20191115030715.GG1849@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 07:03:52AM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> IIUC, if something like Heikki's patch is applied on older branch the
> problem will be magically fixed from the extension point of view so
> that should be safe (an extension would only need to detect the minor
> version to get a more useful error message for users), and all
> alternatives are too intrusive to be patckbatched.
So, Heikki, are you planning to work more on that and commit a change
close to what has been proposed upthread in [1]? It sounds to me that
this has the advantage to be non-intrusive and a similar solution has
been used for GIN indexes. Moving the redesign out of the discussion,
is there actually a downsize with back-patching something like
Heikki's version?
Tom, Alvaro and Julien, do you have more thoughts to share?
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b847493e-d263-3f2e-1802-689e778c9a58@iki.fi
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Wood | 2019-11-15 03:38:19 | Re: 'Invalid lp' during heap_xlog_delete |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2019-11-15 02:53:49 | Re: cost based vacuum (parallel) |