Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

From: Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.
Date: 2018-01-18 13:57:06
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

17.01.2018 11:45, Andrey Borodin:
> Hi!
>> 16 янв. 2018 г., в 21:50, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> написал(а):
>> Updated patches are attached.
> Cool, thanks!
> I've looked into the code, but haven't found anything broken.
> Since I've tried to rebase patch myself and failed on parse utils, I've spend some cycles trying to break parsing.
> One minor complain (no need to fix).
> This is fine
> x4mmm=# create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid,filler,upper(filler));
> ERROR: expressions are not supported in included columns
> But why not same error here? Previous message is very descriptive.
> x4mmm=# create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid,filler,aid+1);
> ERROR: syntax error at or near "+"
> This works. But should not, IMHO
> x4mmm=# create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid,aid,aid);
> Do not know what's that...
> # create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid desc, aid asc);
> All these things allow foot-shooting with a small caliber, but do not break big things.
> Unfortunately, amcheck_next does not work currently on HEAD (there are problems with AllocSetContextCreate() signature), but I've tested bt_index_check() before, during and after pgbench, on primary and on slave. Also, I've checked bt_index_parent_check() on master.

What is amcheck_next ?
> During bt_index_check() test from time to time I was observing
> ERROR: canceling statement due to conflict with recovery
> DETAIL: User query might have needed to see row versions that must be removed.

Sorry, I forgot  to attach the amcheck fix to the previous message.
Now all the patches are in attachment.
Could you recheck if the error is still there?

Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-covering-core_v4.patch text/x-patch 109.6 KB
0002-covering-btree_v4.patch text/x-patch 42.7 KB
0003-covering-amcheck_v4.patch text/x-patch 1.7 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ryan Murphy 2018-01-18 14:04:45 Re: Add default role 'pg_access_server_files'
Previous Message Jeevan Chalke 2018-01-18 13:55:17 Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping