[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       postgis-users
Subject:    Re: [postgis-users] Broken r-tree semantics
From:       strk () refractions ! net
Date:       2005-06-25 11:55:48
Message-ID: 20050625115548.GA29371 () keybit ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

I've back-ported the patches to the 0.9 branch.
--strk;

On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 12:11:00PM -0400, Bill Binko wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 strk@refractions.net wrote:
> 
> > Hello users!
> > 
> > Reference:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-06/msg01108.php
> > 
> > A bug in r-tree semantics has been found and fixed.
> > We ported the fix to postgis, which is also affected by
> > it. Basically in some cases an index scan would fail
> > catching some records that would be coutch by a
> > sequential scan. 
> > 
> > Now:
> > - Do you think it's worth porting the patch to the 0.9 branch ?
> 
> Sounds like the query planner can choose to do an index scan without 
> user's knowledge, correct?  So people who are using 0.9, but who's data 
> count is low may not see the error now, but will as their tables grow?
> 
> I think if that's the case, then you need to either specifically tell 
> everyone to stop using 0.9 or back-port (and I'd recommend back-porting).
> 
> > - Did anyone experienced this problem ?
> 
> I don't think so.
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users@postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]