| From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Minmax indexes |
| Date: | 2014-07-10 17:40:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAGTBQpaRMj=a4z3-5HJdVstdShEU5RxLrkDsab46dyqOQYSYtA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Another thing I noticed is that version 8 of the patch blindly believed
> the "pages_per_range" declared in catalogs. This meant that if somebody
> did "alter index foo set pages_per_range=123" the index would
> immediately break (i.e. return corrupted results when queried). I have
> fixed this by storing the pages_per_range value used to construct the
> index in the metapage. Now if you do the ALTER INDEX thing, the new
> value is only used when the index is recreated by REINDEX.
This seems a lot like parameterizing. So I guess the only thing left
is to issue a NOTICE when said alter takes place (I don't see that on
the patch, but maybe it's there?)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-07-10 18:03:25 | Re: pgindent weirdness |
| Previous Message | Moshe Jacobson | 2014-07-10 16:12:03 | Re: LEFT JOINs not optimized away when not needed |