Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.4 BETA2 ...

From: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck)
To: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com
Cc: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.4 BETA2 ...
Date: 1998-10-14 14:42:41
Message-ID: m0zTS8P-000EBRC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

That was me:
>
> >
> >
> > I just built and regression tested the current source tree on both Solaris
> > x86 and Solaris Sparc, and other then a few bugs that I've fixed, it was
> > smooth...
> >
> > Any arguments against getting a BETA2 out tomorrow afternoon?
>
> Have a crashing backend after a huge transaction on the next
> insert into a table with indices. Crash is reproducable and
> seems to be due to a corrupted index file.
>
> Recompiling with COPT=-g now...
>

Harrr - using text_ops on an int4 field in CREATE INDEX
doesn't make much sense.

Bruce, please add 6.5 TODO:

Parser must check on CREATE INDEX that the opcdeftype of the
used operator class is compatible with the indexed field or
the index functions return type.

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Brook Milligan 1998-10-14 14:44:53 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.4 BETA2 ...
Previous Message Jan Wieck 1998-10-14 14:34:47 Re: [HACKERS] What about LIMIT in SELECT ?