Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Better to fix the callers so that they don't have the assumption you >> refer to. Or maybe we could adjust the API of RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap >> so that it returns all the sets needed by a given calling module at >> once, which would allow us to guarantee they're consistent.
> Note that my "interesting attrs" patch does away with these independent > bitmaps (which was last posted by Pavan as part of his WARM set). I > think we should fix just this bug now, and for the future look at that > other approach. BTW, if there is a risk of the assertion failure that Amit posits, it seems like it should have happened in the tests that Pavan was doing originally. I'd sort of like to see a demonstration that it can actually happen before we spend any great amount of time fixing it. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers