On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 06:01:39PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> I also considered introducing pg_stat_statements-style versioning, but
> it's too late to do that in backbranches, and I don't think we expect
> the function to change very often to justify this.
Sounds good to me, thanks!
--
Michael
I've pushed (and backpatched) a fix for this.
I ended up doing the simplest thing -- error out if the number of
columns does not match, suggesting to update to latest extension version.
I considered handling it in a nicer way, but I didn't like the result
very much and I think that's sufficient f
Dear Tomas,
Thanks for updating the patch.
I've tested new patch and confirmed the brin_pgage_items() could error out:
```
postgres=# SELECT * FROM brin_page_items(get_raw_page('foo_id_idx', 2),
'foo_id_idx');
ERROR: function has wrong number of declared columns
HINT: To resolve the problem,
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 07:54:03PM -0500, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 7:48 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>> 691e8b2e18 is not something I would have done when it comes to
>> pageinspect, FWIW. There is the superuser argument for this module,
>> so I'd vote for an error and apply
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 3:00 PM Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Does that mean you think we should fix the issue at hand differently?
> Say, by looking at number of columns and building the correct tuple,
> like I did in my initial patch?
I don't feel strongly about it either way. But if it was my fix I'd
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 7:48 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 09:00:30PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Does that mean you think we should fix the issue at hand differently?
> > Say, by looking at number of columns and building the correct tuple,
> > like I did in my initial pat
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 09:00:30PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Does that mean you think we should fix the issue at hand differently?
> Say, by looking at number of columns and building the correct tuple,
> like I did in my initial patch?
691e8b2e18 is not something I would have done when it comes
On 11/13/24 18:20, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 11:07 AM Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> My plan was to apply the patch to both 17 and HEAD, and then maybe do
>> something smarter in HEAD in a separate commit. But then Michael pointed
>> out other pageinspect functions just error out
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 11:07 AM Tomas Vondra wrote:
> My plan was to apply the patch to both 17 and HEAD, and then maybe do
> something smarter in HEAD in a separate commit. But then Michael pointed
> out other pageinspect functions just error out in this version-mismatch
> cases, so I think it's
On 11/12/24 09:04, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
> Dear Tomas,
>
>> Here's a fix for pageinspect bug in PG17, reported in [1]. The bug turns
>> out to be introduced by my commit
>
> I could not see the link, but I think it is [1], right?
>
Right. Apologies, I forgot to include the link.
>>
>>
On 11/12/24 08:39, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 07:32:10PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> This adds an out argument to brin_page_items, but I failed to consider
>> the user may still run with an older version of the extension - either
>> after pg_upgrade (as in the report), or
Dear Tomas,
> Here's a fix for pageinspect bug in PG17, reported in [1]. The bug turns
> out to be introduced by my commit
I could not see the link, but I think it is [1], right?
>
> commit dae761a87edae444d11a411f711f1d679bed5941
> Author: Tomas Vondra
> Date: Fri Dec 8 17:07:30 2023 +0100
On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 07:32:10PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> This adds an out argument to brin_page_items, but I failed to consider
> the user may still run with an older version of the extension - either
> after pg_upgrade (as in the report), or when the CREATE EXTENSION
> command specifies VER
13 matches
Mail list logo
