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

Re: Incorrect behaviour when using a GiST index on points

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Incorrect behaviour when using a GiST index on points
Date: 2012-07-03 15:44:13
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Alexander Korotkov
>> <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I think we definitely should apply this patch before 9.2 release, because it
>>> is a bug fix. Otherwise people will continue produce incorrect GiST indexes
>>> with in-core geometrical opclasses until 9.3. Patch is very simple and only
>>> changes few lines of code.
>>> Any thoughts?
>> Do we need to apply this patch to 9.2?
> It's been like that all along, no?

Yeah, but it seems an awful lot like a bug.  In fact... it's hard to
imagine how it could be any more of a bug than this.

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jan UrbaƄskiDate: 2012-07-03 15:45:14
Subject: Re: plpython issue with Win64 (PG 9.2)
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2012-07-03 15:43:14
Subject: Re: Posix Shared Mem patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group