On 6/9/25 00:14, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> ...
>
> I propose to split it like this, into three parts, each addressing a
> particular type of mistake:
>
> 1) gin_check_posting_tree_parent_keys_consistency
>
> 2) gin_check_parent_keys_consistency / att comparisons
>
> 3) gin_check_parent_keys_consistency / setting ptr->parenttup (at the end)
>
> Does this make sense to you? If yes, can you split the patch series like
> this, including a commit message for each part, explaining the fix? We'd
> need the commit message even with a single patch, ofc.
>
The attached v5 patch splits it along these lines, except that the extra
0001 part merely adds a multicolumn index into the regression test. The
0002-0004 parts are ordered to match the TAP test, i.e. it adds tests.
I've copied the points from the report to the commit messages, but this
needs cleanup/rephrasing, to make it readable. Could you look into
that?Of course, if you think the patches should be split differently,
feel free to move stuff.
And as I said before - if you feel the issues are too intertwined and
can't be split like this (or it just doesn't make sense), please speak
up. We can commit that as a single patch. It still needs the commit
message, though.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
