From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PGOPTIONS="-fh" make check gets stuck since Postgres 11 |
Date: | 2019-07-10 13:09:33 |
Message-ID: | CAAKRu_boxkT6iFg6ivozTSajuqVBSWA2KH_9e4sEJyMCSr-f=g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:40 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:51:28PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > It would be good if we can come up with something like that. It will
> > be helpful for zheap, where in some cases we get different row
> > ordering due to in-place updates. As of now, we try to add Order By
> > or do some extra magic to get consistent row ordering.
>
> That was an issue for me as well when working with Postgres-XC when
> the row ordering was not guaranteed depending on the number of nodes
> (speaking of which Greenplum has the same issues, no?). Adding ORDER
> BY clauses to a set of tests may make sense, but then this may impact
> the plans generated for some of them..
> --
> Michael
>
We have a tool that does this. gpdiff [1] is used for results
post-processing
and it uses a perl module called atmsort [2] to deal with the specific
ORDER BY
case discussed here.
[1]
https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/master/src/test/regress/gpdiff.pl
[2]
https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/master/src/test/regress/atmsort.pl
--
Melanie Plageman
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2019-07-10 13:10:36 | Re: Index Skip Scan |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-07-10 13:05:30 | Re: pg_checksums (or checksums in general) vs tableam |