Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2018-01-21 Thread Andrey Borodin
> 21 янв. 2018 г., в 3:36, Peter Geoghegan написал(а): > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:45 AM, Andrey Borodin wrote: >> Unfortunately, amcheck_next does not work currently on HEAD (there are >> problems with AllocSetContextCreate() signature), but I've tested >> bt_index_check() before, during

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2018-01-20 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:45 AM, Andrey Borodin wrote: > Unfortunately, amcheck_next does not work currently on HEAD (there are > problems with AllocSetContextCreate() signature), but I've tested > bt_index_check() before, during and after pgbench, on primary and on slave. > Also, I've checked

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2018-01-18 Thread Andrey Borodin
Hi! > 18 янв. 2018 г., в 18:57, Anastasia Lubennikova > написал(а): > > What is amcheck_next ? amcheck_next is external version of amcheck, maintained by Peter G. on his github. It checks one more thing: that every heap tuple has twin in B-tree, so called heapallindexed check. Version V3 of yo

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2018-01-17 Thread Andrey Borodin
Hi! > 16 янв. 2018 г., в 21:50, Anastasia Lubennikova > написал(а): > > Updated patches are attached. > Cool, thanks! I've looked into the code, but haven't found anything broken. Since I've tried to rebase patch myself and failed on parse utils, I've spend some cycles trying to break parsing

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2018-01-08 Thread Andrey Borodin
Hello! The patch does not apply currently. Anastasia, can you, please, rebase the patch? Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2017-12-04 Thread Andrey Borodin
> 30 нояб. 2017 г., в 23:07, Andrey Borodin написал(а): > > Seems like it was not a big deal of patching, I've fixed those bits (see > attachment). > I've done only simple tests as for now, but I'm planning to do better testing > before next CF. > Thanks for mentioning "heapallindexed", I'll

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2017-11-30 Thread Andrey Borodin
Hi, Peter! > 29 нояб. 2017 г., в 8:45, Peter Geoghegan написал(а): > > It looks like amcheck needs to be patched -- a simple oversight. > amcheck is probably calling _bt_compare() without realizing that > internal pages don't have the extra attributes (just leaf pages, > although they should also

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2017-11-28 Thread Andrey Borodin
> 29 нояб. 2017 г., в 8:45, Peter Geoghegan написал(а): > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote: >>> Postgres crashes: >>> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((const void*)(&isNull) != ((void*)0)) && >>> (scankey->sk_attno)

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2017-11-28 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote: >> Postgres crashes: >> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((const void*)(&isNull) != ((void*)0)) && >> (scankey->sk_attno) > 0)", File: "nbtsearch.c", Line: 466) >> >> May be I'm doing somethi

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2017-11-28 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote: > 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? Us