On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> But I have some concerns about compatibility with my patches.
> I've tried to call bt_index_check() over my "including" patch [1] and caught
> a segfault.
>
> LOG: server process (PID 31794) was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation
> fault
> DETAIL: Failed process was running: select bt_index_check('idx');
>
> I do hope that my patch will be accepted in 9.6, so this conflict looks
> really bad.
> I think that error is caused by changes in pages layout. To save some space
> nonkey attributes are truncated
> [1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/433/
I posted a review of your "Covering + unique indexes" patch, where I
made an educated guess about what the problem is here (I sort of
hinted at what I thought it was already, in this thread, actually). I
haven't actually tested this theory of mine myself just yet, but let
me know what you think of it on the thread for your patch.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
