Re: fix for BUG #3720: wrong results at using ltree

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Filip RembiaƂkowski <filip(dot)rembialkowski(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: fix for BUG #3720: wrong results at using ltree
Date: 2020-03-30 22:58:20
Message-ID: 6352.1585609100@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> I think now it looks as simple as the whole algorithm is.

Yeah, I think we've gotten checkCond to the point of "there's no
longer anything to take away".

I've marked this RFC, and will push tomorrow unless somebody wants
to object to the loss of backwards compatibility.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-03-30 23:03:27 Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots
Previous Message David Steele 2020-03-30 22:56:58 Re: backup manifests