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 →
  1. Remove some more dead VACUUM-FULL-only code.