Hi!
+1 for pushing this. I'm really looking forward to see this in 11.
> 31 окт. 2017 г., в 13:21, Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru> написал(а):
>
> Updated version is attached. It applies to the commit e4fbf22831c2bbcf032ee60a327b871d2364b3f5.
> The first patch patch contains changes in general index routines
> and the second one contains btree specific changes.
>
> This version contains fixes of the issues mentioned in the thread above and passes all existing tests.
> But still it requires review and testing, because the merge was quite uneasy.
> Especially I worry about integration with partitioning. I'll add some more tests in the next message.
I've been doing benchmark tests a year ago, so I skip this part in this review.
I've done some stress tests with pgbench, replication etc. Everything was fine until I plugged in amcheck.
If I create cluster with this [0] and then
./pgbench -i -s 50
create index on pgbench_accounts (abalance) include (bid,aid,filler);
create extension amcheck;
--and finally
SELECT bt_index_check(c.oid), c.relname, c.relpages
FROM pg_index i
JOIN pg_opclass op ON i.indclass[0] = op.oid
JOIN pg_am am ON op.opcmethod = am.oid
JOIN pg_class c ON i.indexrelid = c.oid
JOIN pg_namespace n ON c.relnamespace = n.oid
WHERE am.amname = 'btree' AND n.nspname = 'public'
AND c.relpersistence != 't'
AND i.indisready AND i.indisvalid
ORDER BY c.relpages DESC LIMIT 100;
--just copypasted from amcheck docs with minor corrections
Postgres crashes:
TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((const void*)(&isNull) != ((void*)0)) && (scankey->sk_attno) > 0)", File: "nbtsearch.c",
Line:466)
May be I'm doing something wrong or amcheck support will go with different patch?
Few minor nitpicks:
0. PgAdmin fails to understand what is going on [1] . It is clearly problem of PgAdmin, pg_dump works as expected.
1. ISTM index_truncate_tuple() can be optimized. We only need to reset tuple length and infomask. But this should not
behotpath, anyway, so I propose ignoring this for current version.
2. I've done grammarly checking :) This comma seems redundant [2]
I don't think something of these items require fixing.
Thanks for working on this, I believe it is important.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
[0] https://github.com/x4m/pgscripts/blob/master/install.sh
[1] https://yadi.sk/i/ro9YKFqo3PcwFT
[2]
https://github.com/x4m/postgres_g/commit/657c28952d923d8c150e6cabb3bdcbbc44a641b6?diff=unified#diff-640baf2937029728a8d51cccd554c2eeR1291
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
