Re: mark/restore failures on unsorted merge joins
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, kes-kes@yandex.ru
Date: 2020-11-24T20:49:33Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes: > "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Tom> Looks about right. Not sure if we need to bother with a regression > Tom> test case; once that's in, it'd be hard to break it. > We could check the EXPLAIN output (since the Materialize node would show > up), but it's not easy to get stable plans since the choice of which > path to put on the outside is not fixed. Based on what I found when > actually testing the code, it probably wouldn't be worth the effort. If it's not easy to test, I agree it's not worth it. (Given how long it took anyone to notice this, the difficulty of making a stable test case is unsurprising, perhaps.) regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Properly check index mark/restore in ExecSupportsMarkRestore.
- 660b89928d18 14.0 landed
- 59ed45e278b7 9.5.25 landed
- 6402afd9865e 9.6.21 landed
- 321c87e5ca1a 10.16 landed
- 018e7d98dc15 11.11 landed
- ae5aa26dc39d 12.6 landed
- 6dda057043df 13.2 landed