Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)

From: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Shaun Thomas <shaun(dot)thomas(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)
Date: 2020-04-06 21:12:32
Message-ID: 20200406211232.35s2gmygrfx3ljrj@development
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 04:54:38PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>On 2020-Apr-06, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Locally, things pass without force_parallel_mode, but turning it on
>> produces failures that look similar to rhinoceros's (didn't examine
>> other BF members).
>
>FWIW I looked at the eight failures there were about fifteen minutes ago
>and they were all identical. I can confirm that, in my laptop, the
>tests work without that GUC, and fail in exactly that way with it.
>

Yes, there's a thinko in show_incremental_sort_info() and it returns too
soon. I'll push a fix in a minute.

thanks

--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Zhang 2020-04-06 21:12:38 ERROR: invalid input syntax for type circle
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-04-06 21:09:17 Re: where should I stick that backup?