Thread

  1. Re: [HACKERS] Fix for initdb/indexing problems

    Thomas A. Szybist <szybist@boxhill.com> — 1998-09-03T13:23:39Z

    In message <199809030925.KAA18833@mtcc.demon.co.uk>, Keith Parks writes:
    > Bruce,
    > 
    > Just to confirm, your fixes are just the job.
    > 
    > The regression tests run fine with only the failures I have always
    > seen due to maths precision and SIGFPE handling.
    > 
    > Thanks for your persistence in tracking this "bug" down.
    > 
    > Keith.
    > 
    > 
    > Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
    > > 
    > > OK, I have found the problem.  I looked AGAIN at CatalogIndexInsert(),
    > > because all problems seem to be localized there.  I remembered something
    > > Tom Szybist said yesterday while we were on the phone about Datum only
    > > being one value.
    > > 
    > > I said they are chained together, which I saw in IndexFormDatum, but
    > > when I looked, I saw that the Datum pointer indexed in IndexFormDatum
    > > was only a single Datum value, not an array of datum values like nulls
    > > is defined.
    > > 
    > > With single-key system indexes, this was not a problem, but with the new
    > > multi-key system indicies, it is.
    > > 
    > > I have attached the patch, and it is applied to the tree.  Please let me
    > > know if this fixes the many reported index problems.  It should.
    > > 
    > 
    > 
    
    I just applied this patch to my 08/28 tree.  Looks good! I'm seeing a
    bunch of other regression test failures, but I think most of these
    have been resolved.  I compiling a fresh update now.  Will report later.
    (BTW I'm still in Solaris mode.  I'll also take a look at S/Linux).
    
    Thanks!!
    
    Tom Szybist
    
    szybist@boxhill.com