Em seg., 22 de ago. de 2022 às 01:42, Amit Kapila
escreveu:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 10:04 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Amit Kapila writes:
> > > Right, but as Tom pointed it is still better to change this. However,
> > > I am not sure if we should backpatch this to PG15 as this won't lead
> > >
On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 10:04 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > Right, but as Tom pointed it is still better to change this. However,
> > I am not sure if we should backpatch this to PG15 as this won't lead
> > to any incorrect behavior.
>
> If that code only exists in HEAD and v15 t
Em sáb., 20 de ago. de 2022 às 01:03, Amit Kapila
escreveu:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:45 PM Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >
> > Em sex., 19 de ago. de 2022 às 10:28, Tom Lane
> escreveu:
> >>
> >> Ranier Vilela writes:
> >> > At function parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes there is
> >> > a typo wi
Amit Kapila writes:
> Right, but as Tom pointed it is still better to change this. However,
> I am not sure if we should backpatch this to PG15 as this won't lead
> to any incorrect behavior.
If that code only exists in HEAD and v15 then I'd backpatch.
It's a very low-risk change and it might avo
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 7:45 PM Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
> Em sex., 19 de ago. de 2022 às 10:28, Tom Lane escreveu:
>>
>> Ranier Vilela writes:
>> > At function parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes there is
>> > a typo with a logical connector.
>> > I think that correct is &&, because both of the o
Em sex., 19 de ago. de 2022 às 10:28, Tom Lane escreveu:
> Ranier Vilela writes:
> > At function parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes there is
> > a typo with a logical connector.
> > I think that correct is &&, because both of the operators are
> > bool types [1].
> > As a result, parallel vacuu
Ranier Vilela writes:
> At function parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes there is
> a typo with a logical connector.
> I think that correct is &&, because both of the operators are
> bool types [1].
> As a result, parallel vacuum workers can be incorrectly enabled.
Since they're bools, the C spec
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 5:40 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 5:35 PM Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > At function parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes there is
> > a typo with a logical connector.
> >
> > I think that correct is &&, because both of the operators are
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 5:35 PM Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> At function parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes there is
> a typo with a logical connector.
>
> I think that correct is &&, because both of the operators are
> bool types [1].
>
> As a result, parallel vacuum workers can be incorrect
