Re: GiST multirange index scans can fail to return rows

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: GiST multirange index scans can fail to return rows
Date: 2026-08-02 07:03:01
Message-ID: CAH2-WznAGx7ybvR7RXPEkMCBM38epm+snAVHLNTgDp-UuVRoEw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Andrey,

I think that you forgot to attach the patch with the actual fix?

--
Peter Geoghegan

On Sun, Aug 2, 2026 at 2:12 AM Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 1 Aug 2026, at 20:01, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> >
> > <0001-Add-regression-test-for-multirange-GiST-containment-.patch>
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I agree with the test and also think this is a bug. The check in
> multirange_gist_consistent() is too strict and rejects tuples that
> should reach the recheck. I think we should use
> range_gist_consistent_int_multirange() for this case. Using the
> internal predicate for every strategy would also be correct, but would
> weaken filtering and, IMO, cause unnecessary heap rechecks.
>
> PFA v2 patch set. The first patch is your test, and the second is the
> fix as I see it.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2026-08-02 07:08:17 Re: Bug: XLogReader mishandles oversized multi-page xl_tot_len (potential memory corruption)
Previous Message Andrey Borodin 2026-08-02 06:12:34 Re: GiST multirange index scans can fail to return rows