Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2008-07-24T17:01:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> writes: >> * There is a bigger race condition, which is that after a scan has >> returned a tuple from a pending page, vacuum could move the index entry >> into the main index structure, and then that same scan could return that >> same index entry a second time. This is a no-no, and I don't see any easy >> fix. > Hmm, isn't it allowed for indexes? At least GiST has this behaviour from its > birth date. Really? Then GiST needs to be fixed too. Otherwise you risk having queries return the same row twice. A bitmap indexscan plan would mask such an index bug ... but a plain indexscan won't. regards, tom lane