Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-12-02 Thread Jeff Janes
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 12/01/2013 10:40 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: >> >> The commit 04eee1fa9ee80dabf7 of this series causes a self-deadlock in >>> the >>> LWLock code during the operation below, with it t

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-12-02 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 12/01/2013 10:40 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: The commit 04eee1fa9ee80dabf7 of this series causes a self-deadlock in the LWLock code during the operation below, with it trying to take an LW_EXCLUSIVE on a high, even-numbered lockid when it already

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-12-01 Thread Jeff Janes
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Heikki Linnakangas < > hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > >> Here's another part of my crusade against xlog cleanup routines. This >> series of patches gets rid of the gin_cleanup() function, which is >> currentl

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-11-27 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 11/22/13 15:04, Michael Paquier wrote: 2) post recovery cleanup: - OK, so roughly the soul of this patch is to change the update mechanism for a left child gin page so as the parent split is always done first before any new data is inserted in this child. And this ensures that we can remove th

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-11-27 Thread Jeff Janes
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Here's another part of my crusade against xlog cleanup routines. This > series of patches gets rid of the gin_cleanup() function, which is > currently used to finish splits of GIN b-tree pages, if the system crashes > (or an error occur

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-11-27 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 11/22/13 15:04, Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Here's a new version. To ease the review, I split the remaining patch again into two, where the first patch is just yet more refactoring. I also fixed some bugs in WAL logging and replay that I

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-11-22 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Here's a new version. To ease the review, I split the remaining patch again > into two, where the first patch is just yet more refactoring. > > I also fixed some bugs in WAL logging and replay that I bumped into while > testing. Cool. He

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-11-20 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 19.11.2013 14:48, Michael Paquier wrote: Here is a review of the first three patches: 1) Further gin refactoring: make check passes (core tests and contrib tests). Code compiles without warnings. Committed. Then... About the patch... Even if I got little experience with code of gin, moving

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-11-20 Thread Michael Paquier
Here are some comments about the 4th patch. 1) Compiles without warnings, passes make check. 2) s/ginFinshSplit/ginFinishSplit 3) Server crashes when trying to create a gin index index creation (see example of previous email with pg_trgm). Here is the backtrace of the crash: * thread #1: tid = 0x15

Re: [HACKERS] Handling GIN incomplete splits

2013-11-19 Thread Michael Paquier
Hi, Here is a review of the first three patches: 1) Further gin refactoring: make check passes (core tests and contrib tests). Code compiles without warnings. Then... About the patch... Even if I got little experience with code of gin, moving the flag for search mode out of btree, as well as remov