Re: idea for concurrent seqscans
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: idea for concurrent seqscans |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21739.1109432872@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: idea for concurrent seqscans ("Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: idea for concurrent seqscans
Re: idea for concurrent seqscans |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> writes: > 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? Like I said originally, we could certainly devise a solution if we needed to. I was just pointing out that this is a nontrivial consideration, and I don't want to buy into it if the patch proves to offer only marginal performance improvements. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: