Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hamid Akhtar
Subject Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength
Date
Msg-id CANugjhukOKG_7t1OX6LqCOJe-jAk1yzU6U-YTT-9mWZhj7ry5g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength
List pgsql-hackers


On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 8:43 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Hamid Akhtar <hamid.akhtar@gmail.com> writes:
> I've gone through the patch and applied on the master branch, other than a few hunks, and whether as suggested upthread, the default case for "switch (op->number)" should throw an error or not, I found that bloom regression is crashing.
> -------------
> test bloom                        ... FAILED (test process exited with exit code 2)       20 ms

Hmm ... I think you must have done something wrong.  For me,
am-check-members-callback-5.patch still applies cleanly (just a few
small offsets), and it passes that test as well as the rest of
check-world.  The cfbot agrees [1].

Maybe you didn't "make clean" before rebuilding?

                        regards, tom lane

[1] https://travis-ci.org/github/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/builds/712599990

I was pretty sure I did make clean before testing the patch, but perhaps I didn't as re-running it causes all tests to pass.

Sorry for the false alarm. All good with the patch.

--
Highgo Software (Canada/China/Pakistan)
URL : www.highgo.ca
ADDR: 10318 WHALLEY BLVD, Surrey, BC
CELL:+923335449950  EMAIL: mailto:hamid.akhtar@highgo.ca
SKYPE: engineeredvirus

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: James Sewell
Date:
Subject: Re: Threading in BGWorkers (!)
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tab completion for VACUUM of partitioned tables