Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j8cLi-0007cT-8c for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2020 04:06:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1j8cLf-0000Gi-RP for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2020 04:06:31 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1j8cLf-0000Ga-Jm for pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2020 04:06:31 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j8cLd-0002Uc-2v for pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2020 04:06:31 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 02246Oix001641; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 23:06:24 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Peter Geoghegan cc: pgsql-committers Subject: Re: pgsql: Add deduplication to nbtree. In-reply-to: References: <27003.1583087095@sss.pgh.pa.us> <29676.1583090977@sss.pgh.pa.us> <5838.1583100843@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Geoghegan message dated "Sun, 01 Mar 2020 16:09:37 -0800" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1639.1583121984.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 23:06:24 -0500 Message-ID: <1640.1583121984@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Peter Geoghegan writes: > On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 3:01 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> I am happy to add parallel-to-_bt_form_posting() assertions about >> alignment to _bt_form_posting(), to nail it down completely. Plus I'll >> add the assertion I suggested already. Once I commit a patch with >> these two new assertions, I think that we can consider the matter >> resolved. Does that seem reasonable to you? > I was thinking of the approach taken in the attached patch. It more or > less copies over the assertions from _bt_form_posting() that did not > appear in _bt_update_posting(). OK by me. regards, tom lane