From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Vinod Sridharan <vsridh90@gmail.com>
Cc: niek.brasa@hitachienergy.com
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18831: Particular queries using gin-indexes are not interruptible, resulting is resource usage concerns.
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 23:00:31 -0400
Message-ID: <1098251.1744426831@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFMdLD4SC1=NDOHL-LOAonb6aycv2D1MGbwdiT3M9=A7SfiXow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <18831-e845ac44ebc5dd36@postgresql.org>
<474911.1741207802@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAFMdLD7XzsXfi1+DpTqTgrD8XU0i2C99KuF=5VHLWjx4C1pkcg@mail.gmail.com>
<1026035.1744415680@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAFMdLD4SC1=NDOHL-LOAonb6aycv2D1MGbwdiT3M9=A7SfiXow@mail.gmail.com>
Vinod Sridharan <vsridh90@gmail.com> writes:
> -- create textops operator class without triconsistent
OK, got it, and I concur that we need to make shimTriConsistentFn()
restore the state of the entryRes array before it returns. But
I don't understand why you're concerned about "However, this would
also reset it during the regular triConsistent check per tuple"?
I think the point is basically that this function is violating
the expectation that triconsistent functions not change the state
of that array. That expectation doesn't depend on what the call
site is.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, vsridh90@gmail.com, niek.brasa@hitachienergy.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18831: Particular queries using gin-indexes are not interruptible, resulting is resource usage concerns.
In-Reply-To: <1098251.1744426831@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox