Re: enable_incremental_sort changes query behavior

Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>

From: Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>
To: James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jaime.casanova@2ndquadrant.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-12-01T09:08:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 01.12.2020 03:08, James Coleman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 4:39 PM Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> I've pushed the 0001 part, i.e. the main fix. Not sure about the other
>> parts (comments and moving the code back to postgres_fdw) yet.
> I noticed the CF entry [1] got moved to the next CF; I'm thinking this
> entry should be marked as committed since the fix for the initial bug
> reported on this thread has been pushed. We have the parallel safety
> issue outstanding, but there's a separate thread and patch for that,
> so I'll make a new CF entry for that.
>
> I can mark it as committed, but I'm not sure how to "undo" (or if
> that's desirable) the move to the next CF.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> James
>
> 1: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/30/2754/
>
>
Oops...
I must have rushed with this one, thank you for noticing.
I don't see how to move it back either. I think it's fine to mark it as 
Committed where it is now.

-- 
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company




Commits

  1. Disallow SRFs when considering sorts below Gather Merge

  2. Error out when Gather Merge input is not sorted

  3. Fix get_useful_pathkeys_for_relation for volatile expressions

  4. Guard against core dump from uninitialized subplan.