Re: [HACKERS] Cause of intermittent rangetypes regression test failures

2011-11-14 Thread Tom Lane
Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes: On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 15:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: I think this demonstrates that the current definition of range_before is broken. It is not reasonable for it to throw an error on a perfectly valid input ... at least, not unless you'd like to mark it

Re: [HACKERS] Cause of intermittent rangetypes regression test failures

2011-11-14 Thread Jeff Davis
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 08:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: It needs to return FALSE, actually. After further reading I realized that you have that behavior hard-wired into the range GiST routines, and it's silly to make the stand-alone versions of the function act differently. Good point. That makes

Re: [HACKERS] Cause of intermittent rangetypes regression test failures

2011-11-14 Thread Tom Lane
Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes: On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 08:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: It needs to return FALSE, actually. After further reading I realized that you have that behavior hard-wired into the range GiST routines, and it's silly to make the stand-alone versions of the function act

Re: [HACKERS] Cause of intermittent rangetypes regression test failures

2011-11-14 Thread Erik Rijkers
On Mon, November 14, 2011 19:43, Tom Lane wrote: Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes: On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 08:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: While thinking about this ... would it be sensible for range_lower and range_upper to return NULL instead of throwing an exception for empty or infinite

[HACKERS] Cause of intermittent rangetypes regression test failures

2011-11-13 Thread Tom Lane
Well, I was overthinking the question of why rangetypes sometimes fails with select count(*) from test_range_gist where ir int4range(100,500); ! ERROR: input range is empty Turns out that happens whenever auto-analyze has managed to process test_range_gist before we get to this part of the

Re: [HACKERS] Cause of intermittent rangetypes regression test failures

2011-11-13 Thread Jeff Davis
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 15:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: If the table has been analyzed, then the most_common_values array for column ir will consist of {empty} which is entirely correct since that value accounts for 16% of the table. And then, when mcv_selectivity tries to estimate