| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: regress: query discrepancy between explain vs execution |
| Date: | 2026-10-19 21:39:51 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvqyq6hN2WOUa1WC=1+dwbXgCN7WzS+DLfP2CXWo9ktSjg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 19 Oct 2026 at 23:03, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2026, 02:46 David Rowley, <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I looked at this and noticed a couple more mistakes. Can you share why
> > you picked the HAVING query over the version without?
>
> Because that was more consistent with the rest of the queries in the
> file. Every other explained-and-then-executed query on pagg_tab_ml
> has a HAVING clause, except these.
Thanks for explaining.
> > v2 attached with the other things I noticed. array_agg has supported
> > partial aggregation since v16 (16fd03e95).
>
> Thanks, LGTM.
Pushed. I did a back patch of this too, as this test file has really
not changed much since REL_14_STABLE, and I felt doing that might
reduce some future backpatching pain.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2026-10-19 22:03:58 | Re: Publication of same parent table with ONLY-ness mismatch should error |
| Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2026-10-19 21:34:31 | Re: DOCS - CREATE PUBLICATION wording re 'ONLY' for partitioned tables. |