Re: idea for concurrent seqscans

On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 11:51:40PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> writes:
> >> but I also hate to burden the developers with rewriting a lot of
> >> regression tests when their time could be better spent elsewhere.
> 
> > Certainly, but I suspect it's just a matter of adding ORDER BY to
> > everything, which just about anyone (even myself!) should be able to do.
> 
> Performance is not the issue; test coverage, however, is an issue.
> See the comment at the end of
> http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/regress-evaluation.html#AEN22383

Assuming you're talkning about "You might wonder why we don't order all
the regression test queries explicitly to get rid of this issue once and
for all. The reason is that that would make the regression tests less
useful, not more, since they'd tend to exercise query plan types that
produce ordered results to the exclusion of those that don't.", good
point. I can think of 2 ways around this:

1) Select into a temptable, then select out of it with an order by

2) Run the output through sort before doing the diff

Is there any reason one of these wouldn't work?
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant               decibel@decibel.org 
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"