Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: idea for concurrent seqscans

From: Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: idea for concurrent seqscans
Date: 2005-02-26 00:04:32
Message-ID: 1109376273.4089.169.camel@jeff (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2005-02-25 at 13:30 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org> writes:
> > I didn't consider that. Is there a reason the regression tests assume
> > the results will be returned in a certain order (or a consistent order)?
> 
> We use diff as the checking tool.
> 

Well, that does make testing more difficult, or it at least requires
extra work to make the regression tests understand the results better.

I'll sumbmit a better patch, and then if everyone decides it's worth the
hassle with the regression tests, we can use it in 8.1. Some more
testing is required to see if the results are really as good as we hope.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2005-02-26 00:11:30
Subject: Re: Modifying COPY TO
Previous:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2005-02-26 00:03:53
Subject: Re: idea for concurrent seqscans

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group