Re: Analyzing bug 8049
| От | Jov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Analyzing bug 8049 |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CADyrUxNMndtOW4vjTjGZsvsrW_XLY5UT1TYoKHH83astHrFW4Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Analyzing bug 8049 ("Dickson S. Guedes" <listas@guedesoft.net>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
I don't think so. It makes bugs like this hidden,but people will complaint pg is not that reliable because different stat data can make pg produce different result for the same query.
2013/4/12 Dickson S. Guedes <listas@guedesoft.net>
Em Sex, 2013-04-12 às 10:58 -0400, Tom Lane escreveu:> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:In my tests, after ANALYZE _bug_header and _bug_line, the query plan
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> The plan I'm considering is to get this written and committed to HEAD
> >> in the next week, so that it can go out in 9.3beta1. After the patch
> >> has survived a reasonable amount of beta testing, I'd be more comfortable
> >> about back-patching into 9.2.
>
> > I'm not very sanguine about the chances that back-patching this won't
> > provoke any screams of agony ... but I don't have a better idea,
> > either. Letting queries return wrong answers isn't a superior
> > solution, for sure.
>
> The only alternative I can see is to make a back-patch that just teaches
> get_eclass_for_sort_expr() to compute valid nullable_relids for the sort
> expression.
changes and query results returns as expected. Is this a chance that
things isn't too bad?
[]s
--
Dickson S. Guedes
mail/xmpp: guedes@guedesoft.net - skype: guediz
http://guedesoft.net - http://www.postgresql.org.br
http://www.rnp.br/keyserver/pks/lookup?search=0x8F3E3C06D428D10A
Jov
blog: http:amutu.com/blog
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: