Re: idea for concurrent seqscans

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: idea for concurrent seqscans
Date: 2005-02-26 01:51:40
Message-ID: 200502260151.j1Q1peq21392@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 01:30:57PM -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.
>
> Doesn't the SQL spec specifically state that the only time you'll get
> results in a deterministic order is if you use ORDER BY? Assuming
> otherwise seems a bad idea (though at least in the case of testing it
> makes the test more strenuous rather than less...)

The only trick I can think of is to use SELECT ... INTO TEMPORARY tab
... oRDER BY and then use COPY to dump the table. It will then dump in
the order of the ORDER BY.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-02-26 01:52:40 Re: idea for concurrent seqscans
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2005-02-26 00:30:17 Re: idea for concurrent seqscans