Re: GiST nitpicks I want to discuss (and maybe eventually fix)
Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>
From: Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>
To: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-10-07T08:52:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi, On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 12:02:21AM +0500, Kirill Reshke wrote: > On Mon, 6 Oct 2025 at 23:53, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > > Makes sense. I hope one day we will add a catalog field to track > > index creation version. This would pave the way to get rid of > > invalid GiST tuples and return this flag too. We can use it for > > something better. > > In the GIN index we have an index creation version, and it is placed > on the metapage. So does btree, if i'm not mistaken . So, the index > version is stored in data, not in catalog. I doubt we will support two > technologies for one purpose. Since GiST index has no metapage, I > doubt we will be successful here. I always found it klunky that you need (AFAIK) an extension (pageinspect) to figure out the btree/gin index version via its meta-page and ISTM that this would be useful information to be stored in the catalog. Michael
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Remove some more dead VACUUM-FULL-only code.
- 68446b2c87a2 9.0.0 cited