Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2023-04-19T19:20:51Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi, On 2023-04-19 12:16:24 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 11:17:04AM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote: > > Ultimately this is probably fine. If we wanted to modify one of the > > existing tests to cover the multi-batch case, changing the select > > count(*) to a select * would do the trick. I imagine we wouldn't want to > > do this because of the excessive output this would produce. I wondered > > if there was a pattern in the tests for getting around this. > > You could use explain (ANALYZE). But the output is machine-dependant in > various ways (which is why the tests use "explain analyze so rarely). I think with sufficient options it's not machine specific. We have a bunch of EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, COSTS OFF, SUMMARY OFF, TIMING OFF) .. in our tests. Greetings, Andres Freund
Commits
-
Fix instability in regression test for Parallel Hash Full Join
- 3e8da50244a8 16.0 landed