On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Andrew Borodin <boro...@octonica.com> wrote:
> 2017-06-13 18:00 GMT+05:00 Shubham Barai <shubhambara...@gmail.com>:

> Good job!

+1!  :-)

> So, in current HEAD test predicate_gist_2.spec generate false
> positives, but with your patch, it does not?

Keep in mind, that false positives do not break *correctness* of serializable
transactions as long as it involves another transaction.  (It *would* be a bug
if a transaction running alone could cause a serialization failure.)  A false
*negative* is always a bug.

That said, false positives hurt performance, so we should keep the rate as low
as practicable.

> I'd suggest keeping spec tests with your code in the same branch, it's
> easier.


> Also it worth to clean up specs style and add some words to
> documentation.


> Kevin, all, how do you think, is it necessary to expand these tests
> not only on Index Only Scan, but also on Bitmap Index Scan? And may be
> KNN version of scan too?
> I couldn't find such tests for B-tree, do we have them?

Off-hand, I don't know.  It would be interesting to run regression tests with
code coverage and look at the index AMs.


Kevin Grittner
VMware vCenter Server

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to