Commitf84c860

committed

Add error check for lossy distance functions in index-only scans.

Maybe we should actually support this, but for the moment let's justthrow an error if the opclass tries it.

1 parent7280948 commitf84c860Copy full SHA for f84c860

File tree

+13

-0

lines changed

+13

-0

lines changed

Lines changed: 13 additions & 0 deletions

Original file line number	Diff line number	Diff line change
`@@ -165,6 +165,19 @@ IndexOnlyNext(IndexOnlyScanState *node)`
`165`	`165`	`}`
`166`	`166`	`}`
`167`	`167`
	`168`	`+/*`
	`169`	`+ * We don't currently support rechecking ORDER BY distances. (In`
	`170`	`+ * principle, if the index can support retrieval of the originally`
	`171`	`+ * indexed value, it should be able to produce an exact distance`
	`172`	`+ * calculation too. So it's not clear that adding code here for`
	`173`	`+ * recheck/re-sort would be worth the trouble. But we should at least`
	`174`	`+ * throw an error if someone tries it.)`
	`175`	`+ */`
	`176`	`+if (scandesc->numberOfOrderBys>0&&scandesc->xs_recheckorderby)`
	`177`	`+ereport(ERROR,`
	`178`	`+(errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),`
	`179`	`+errmsg("lossy distance functions are not supported in index-only scans")));`
	`180`	`+`
`168`	`181`	`/*`
`169`	`182`	`* Predicate locks for index-only scans must be acquired at the page`
`170`	`183`	`* level when the heap is not accessed, since tuple-level predicate`

Comments

(0)