Re: Doc chapter for Hash Indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Doc chapter for Hash Indexes
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1JxorgyzYgL=c3SB9vD=ZGc-jmHdfTdzMV_02Fn4FKh5g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Doc chapter for Hash Indexes  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Doc chapter for Hash Indexes
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 3:43 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 3:11 PM Simon Riggs
> <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 4:17 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 1:29 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > aOn Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 12:56:51PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 5:12 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 2:31 PM Simon Riggs
> > > > > > <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I attach both clean and compare versions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do we want to hold this work for PG15 or commit in PG14 and backpatch
> > > > > > it till v10 where we have made hash indexes crash-safe? I would vote
> > > > > > for committing in PG14 and backpatch it till v10, however, I am fine
> > > > > > if we want to commit just to PG14 or PG15.
> > > > >
> > > > > Backpatch makes sense to me, but since not everyone will be reading
> > > > > this thread, I would look towards PG15 only first. We may yet pick up
> > > > > additional corrections or additions before a backpatch, if that is
> > > > > agreed.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, I think backpatching makes sense.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I checked and found that there are two commits (7c75ef5715 and
> > > 22c5e73562) in the hash index code in PG-11 which might have impacted
> > > what we write in the documentation. However, AFAICS, nothing proposed
> > > in the patch would change due to those commits. Even, if we don't want
> > > to back patch, is there any harm in committing this to PG-14?
> >
> > I've reviewed those commits and the related code, so I agree.
> >
>
> Do you agree to just commit this to PG-14 or to commit in PG-14 and
> backpatch till PG-10?
>

I am planning to go through the patch once again and would like to
commit and backpatch till v10 in a day to two unless someone thinks
otherwise.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ajin Cherian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Next
From: Richard Guo
Date:
Subject: Re: Using each rel as both outer and inner for JOIN_ANTI