On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Committed with those changes. > > Thanks for above corrections and commit. But, There are couple of > things that we might have to change once the patch for 'WAL in Hash > Indexes' gets checked-in. > > 1) The test-case result needs to be changed because there won't be any > WARNING message : "WARNING: hash indexes are not WAL-logged and their > use is discouraged". > > 2) From WAL patch for Hash Indexes onwards, we won't have any zero > pages in Hash Indexes so I don't think we need to have column showing > zero pages (zero_pages). When working on WAL in hash indexes, we found > that WAL routine 'XLogReadBufferExtended' does not expect a page to be > completely zero page else it returns Invalid Buffer. To fix this, we > started initializing freed overflow page and newly allocated bucket > pages using _hash_pageinit() hence I don't think there will be any > zero pages from here onwards.
Maybe we should call them "unused pages". Those will presumably still exist. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
