Re: [HACKERS] BTREE_BUILD_STATS build is broken

Peter Geoghegan writes: > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> (More generally, is there a better answer for that problem?) > My unpublished parallel B-Tree index build patch will move everything > to do with index builds into nbtsort.c.

Re: [HACKERS] BTREE_BUILD_STATS build is broken

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Does it appear to compile without that? It does. The only thing that's absent is the pgrminclude directive, which is of course just a C comment. > (More generally, is there a better answer for that problem?) My unpublished

Re: [HACKERS] BTREE_BUILD_STATS build is broken

Peter Geoghegan writes: > If BTREE_BUILD_STATS needs a "tcopprot.h pgrminclude ignore" within > nbtree.c, then ISTM that the similar include directive within > nbtsort.c ought to receive the same treatment. Does it appear to compile without that? (More generally, is there a

Re: [HACKERS] BTREE_BUILD_STATS build is broken

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Pushed, thanks. Thanks. If BTREE_BUILD_STATS needs a "tcopprot.h pgrminclude ignore" within nbtree.c, then ISTM that the similar include directive within nbtsort.c ought to receive the same treatment. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: [HACKERS] BTREE_BUILD_STATS build is broken

Peter Geoghegan writes: > The attached patch fixes the BTREE_BUILD_STATS build. Looks like > 65c5fcd353a859da9e61bfb2b92a99f12937de3b broke this. That commit was > made back in January, so no backpatch is required. Pushed, thanks. regards, tom lane --

[HACKERS] BTREE_BUILD_STATS build is broken

The attached patch fixes the BTREE_BUILD_STATS build. Looks like 65c5fcd353a859da9e61bfb2b92a99f12937de3b broke this. That commit was made back in January, so no backpatch is required. -- Peter Geoghegan From 06d2150ff20dfa3e6fbc579a9e41ff3f6487 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Geoghegan