Re: PostgreSQL TPC-H test result?

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Treat <robert(at)omniti(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amber <guxiaobo1982(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL TPC-H test result?
Date: 2008-09-10 09:20:32
Message-ID: 1221038432.3913.647.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-performance


On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 16:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> That's probably not good because it *looks* like we support the syntax,
> but in fact produce non-spec-compliant results. I think it might be
> better if we threw an error.

Definitely. If we accept SQL Standard syntax like this but then not do
what we should, it is clearly an ERROR. Our reputation will be damaged
if we don't, since people will think that we are blase about standards
compliance and about query correctness. Please lets move swiftly to plug
this hole, as if it were a data loss bug (it is, if it causes wrong
answers to queries for unsuspecting users).

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tommy Gildseth 2008-09-10 10:09:53 "Stuck" query
Previous Message Mark Cave-Ayland 2008-09-10 08:43:10 Re: Various intermittent bugs/instability - how to debug?

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Sullivan 2008-09-10 14:08:26 Re: PostgreSQL TPC-H test result?
Previous Message Mark Wong 2008-09-10 06:53:17 Effects of setting linux block device readahead size