Horton

Re: Comment in ginpostinglist.c doesn't match code

Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal@pivotal.io>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal@pivotal.io>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, Adam Berlin <aberlin@pivotal.io>, Alexandra Wang <lewang@pivotal.io>
Date: 2019-08-22T22:05:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 1:14 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:

>
> The patch also includes a little unit test module to test this without
> creating a 16 TB table. A whole new test module seems a bit like
> overkill just for this, but clearly we were missing test coverage here.
> And it will come handy, if we want to invent a new better posting list
> format in the future. Thoughts on whether to include the test module or
> not?
>

I like the test as importantly adds missing coverage. Also, really
simplifies validation effort if required to make change in this area
anytime in future. So, I would +1 keeping the same.

Commits

  1. Fix overflow check and comment in GIN posting list encoding.