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

Re: BUG #5784: CREATE INDEX USING GIN complains about array containing null values yet none exist

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Martin Atukunda <matlads(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: BUG #5784: CREATE INDEX USING GIN complains about array containing null values yet none exist
Date: 2010-12-06 22:20:46
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
On 05.12.2010 18:26, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund<andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>  writes:
>> On Sunday 05 December 2010 17:42:59 Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I think the reason the given example fails is just that it's all being
>>> done in one transaction.  If the null-containing row were known dead
>>> it wouldn't get indexed.  So: commit.
>> Um I doubt it.
> [ gets out gdb... ]  Oh: the reason GIN is complaining is that it's just
> looking at ARR_HASNULL(), and the array's has-nulls flag is still set
> because we don't bother to try to clear it after replacing one element
> of the array.  (Which in general would be an expensive thing to try to
> do...)
> If we were intending to leave GIN in its current nulls-hating state,
> the thing to do would be to replace the stupid ARR_HASNULL check with
> something more intelligent.  But really it needs to be fixed to handle
> nulls properly, so I'm thinking that might be a dead-end patch.

Sounds like we'd still want to just replace ARR_HASNULL() with something 
more intelligent in back-branches though.

   Heikki Linnakangas

In response to


pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Abdellah AmraniDate: 2010-12-07 10:09:51
Subject: Privileges to start system services
Previous:From: Jorge Augusto MeiraDate: 2010-12-06 20:09:54
Subject: Re: Problems with max_connections parameter

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group