From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Arseniy Mukhin <arseniy(dot)mukhin(dot)dev(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: GIN tries to form a tuple with a partial compressedList during insertion |
Date: | 2025-09-25 22:20:59 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoCigf-S=NeqscAvqq+5Jnqh2KkVeARPZgPf7dGQ=uJLww@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 12:41 PM Arseniy Mukhin
<arseniy(dot)mukhin(dot)dev(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Here is a new version. I added a commit message. I will add it to PG19-2.
Thank you for the patch.
I think the proposed change is reasonable; if we fail to compress all
ItemPointers, it doesn't make sense to try to form a tuple from it.
Here are some review comments:
---
- compressedList = ginCompressPostingList(newItems, newNPosting,
GinMaxItemSize,
-
NULL);
+ compressedList = ginCompressPostingList(newItems, newNPosting,
GinMaxItemSize - GinGetPostingOffset(old),
+
&nwritten);
Why does it need to subtract GinGetPostingOffset(old) from the maxsize?
---
pfree(newItems);
- if (compressedList)
+ if (nwritten == newNPosting)
{
res = GinFormTuple(ginstate, attnum, key, category,
(char *) compressedList,
SizeOfGinPostingList(compressedList),
newNPosting,
false);
- pfree(compressedList);
}
+ pfree(compressedList);
I think it would be cleaner if we move 'pfree(newItems)' to before
'pfree(compressedList)'.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2025-09-25 22:23:23 | Re: Remove unused parameter on check_and_push_window_quals |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2025-09-25 21:50:38 | Re: Remove unused parameter on check_and_push_window_quals |