Re: BUG #19633: Unexpected results of IN (subquery) with a non-deterministic collation

чт, 10 сент. 2026 г. в 05:10, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 7:40 AM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > I've revised the patch. The v3 changes are:
> > 1. The test now covers the hash path as well. v2 turned
> > enable_hashagg off, which is precisely the plan shape that was not
> > broken in isolation; both strategies are now exercised, each with its
> > plan and its result.
>
> I think it'd better to resue existing tables rather than create
> new ones for the tests. Maybe we can reuse test1cs/test1ci,
> test2cs/test2ci, test3cs/test3ci to reproduce this issue?
>

fix in v4

> Also on master we have this new GUC enable_groupagg. Maybe it'd
> better to use that instead of enable_sort?
>
> This GUC exists only on master (e01b23b84e4, July 2026) and is not present
on REL_14_STABLE through REL_19_STABLE, so it is preferable to keep
enable_sort=off — that way the tests won't diverge from the backpatch.

--
Regards,
Rachitskiy Andrey