Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch
| От | Hannu Krosing |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 36B8273D.6DFFF721@trust.ee обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch (jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck)) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hannu Krosing wrote: > > Jan Wieck wrote: > > > > > > Is the patch by Jan that eliminated the duplicate sort node in case it > > > was redundant included in 6.5 ? > > > > Sorry, > > > > I missed to put it into after v6.4 release. And since it > > wasn't there during v6.5 development, I would not put it in ... > But if it is not relesed it will _never_ be tested enough ... > > As we are just going into beta, not relese, I would suggest to put > it in now, and back out if it relly breaks anything. I will download the latest snapshot tonight and test the patch there. Does anyone know if something introduced in 6.5 can break by omitting the top sort node ? Perhaps any of the following: * MVCC * temp tables * Some exotic use of rules * SELECT FOR UPDATE I myself can't see how it could break, as the only thing the patch does is omitting a top sort node if the query is already in the right order. So it should be equivalent of just not including the ORDER BY in the SELECT in the first place. Jan - I often feel the same about some of my code that are part of some larger complex project (ie. if it aint broke, don't fix it), but this time I think the patch is quite safe, and very very useful for at least two occasions: getting the start of some table out to users web and for processing huge tables in predictable/repeatable order. I somewhat understand your hesitation, because I can't either think of any test in regression that could be broken by the patch, but instead of making me uneasy it makes me happy ;) ----------------- Hannu
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: