From: | Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ted Yu <yuzhihong(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | akorotkov(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: checking snapshot argument for index_beginscan |
Date: | 2022-12-22 21:13:50 |
Message-ID: | CALT9ZEE95m020P0-pq4we6-LkkkhFFKOfBzRjXTZWxp=ot7=AA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 23 Dec 2022 at 00:36, Ted Yu <yuzhihong(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I was looking at commit 941aa6a6268a6a66f6895401aad6b5329111d412 .
>>
>> I think it would be better to move the assertion into `index_beginscan_internal` because it is called by index_beginscan and index_beginscan_bitmap
>>
>> In the future, when a new variant of `index_beginscan_XX` is added, the assertion would be effective for the new variant.
>>
>> Please let me know what you think.
Hi, Ted!
The two asserts out of four could be combined as you proposed in the patch.
Assert added by 941aa6a6268a6a66f6 to index_parallelscan_initialize
should remain anyway as otherwise, we can have Segfault in
SerializeSnapshot called from this function.
Assert in index_parallelscan_estimate can be omitted as there is the
same assert inside EstimateSnapshotSpace called from this function.
I've included it into version 2 of a patch.
Not sure it's worth the effort but IMO the patch is right and can be committed.
Kind regards,
Pavel Borisov,
Supabase.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Optimize-asserts-introduced-in-941aa6a6268a6a66f6.patch | application/x-patch | 1.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2022-12-22 21:23:52 | Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15 (typo) |
Previous Message | Ted Yu | 2022-12-22 20:35:59 | Re: checking snapshot argument for index_beginscan |