Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 623596.1684541098@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I noticed that BF animal conchuela has several times fallen over on the test case added by 558c9d75f: diff -U3 /home/pgbf/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/regress/expected/join_hash.out /home/pgbf/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/regress/results/join_hash.out --- /home/pgbf/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/regress/expected/join_hash.out 2023-04-19 10:20:26.159840000 +0200 +++ /home/pgbf/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/regress/results/join_hash.out 2023-04-19 10:21:47.971900000 +0200 @@ -974,8 +974,8 @@ SELECT * FROM hjtest_matchbits_t1 t1 FULL JOIN hjtest_matchbits_t2 t2 ON t1.id = t2.id; id | id ----+---- - 1 | | 2 + 1 | (2 rows) -- Test serial full hash join. Considering that this is a parallel plan, I don't think there's any mystery about why an ORDER-BY-less query might have unstable output order; the only mystery is why more of the buildfarm hasn't failed. Can we just add "ORDER BY t1.id" to this query? It looks like you get the same PHJ plan, although now underneath Sort/Gather Merge. regards, tom lane [1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=conchuela&dt=2023-04-19%2008%3A20%3A56 [2] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=conchuela&dt=2023-05-03%2006%3A21%3A03 [3] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=conchuela&dt=2023-05-19%2022%3A21%3A04
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: