| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Returning nbtree posting list TIDs in DESC order during backwards scans |
| Date: | 2025-12-11 01:51:24 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmqUpoVVZEu51SOpcxf9OvueLnzr1yE0ZMmcNHarDdFPw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 5:33 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> I did have a comment like that at one point, but I felt that it didn't
> quite make sense to keep it. Such a comment would address how things
> used to work, not how they work now (also how they really should have
> worked all along).
On second thought, you (Victor) had this right: we really should have
such a comment.
I must have forgotten that the loop in _bt_killitems doesn't iterate
through so->currPos.items[] directly; it iterates through
killedItems[]. Earlier versions of the patch (that fully got rid of
killedItems) *directly* looped over so->currPos.items[], but the
committed version doesn't work that way.
I pushed a commit just now that adds a comment to clarify the
situation. It specifically mentions posting list tuples, per your
suggestion. (The commit also adds a documenting assertion to verify
leaf page order within the _bt_killitems loop.)
Thanks
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Euler Taveira | 2025-12-11 01:57:51 | Re: log_min_messages per backend type |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira | 2025-12-11 01:27:53 | Re: not translating backend types for ps and log_line_prefix |