Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only)

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> What I don't much like is that it enlarges cluster.out with 200K of
> random-looking, hard-to-manually-verify data. May I suggest that
> we replace the SELECTs with
>
> select * from
> (select hundred, lag(hundred) over () as lhundred,
> thousand, lag(thousand) over () as lthousand,
> tenthous, lag(tenthous) over () as ltenthous from clstr_4) ss
> where row(hundred, thousand, tenthous) <= row(lhundred, lthousand, ltenthous);
> hundred | lhundred | thousand | lthousand | tenthous | ltenthous
> ---------+----------+----------+-----------+----------+-----------
> (0 rows)

It independently occurred to me that I should have done something like
this afterwards. I agree.

> If you're good with that adjustment, I'm happy to commit this.

I am happy with the adjustment. Please commit the adjusted patch.

--
Peter Geoghegan