Minor issue with BRIN regression tests
Attached patch adjusts BRIN regression tests to make a non-obvious
dependency on tuple order explicit. Currently, an index-only scan plan
is used by the query that I've adjusted. I'd rather be sure that that
continues.
This was spotted while running the regression tests with the Postgres
default B-Tree fillfactor significantly reduced. There was only one
other failure, but that one was really obvious; in general I wouldn't
bother with "fixing" such things. This, however, seems problematic,
because insertion order matters for the purposes of the test. It's
perhaps implied that the test consistently relies on the stable order
of things within the tenk1 table, but it isn't actually so.
--
Peter Geoghegan
Attachments:
brin-order-test.patchtext/x-patch; charset=US-ASCII; name=brin-order-test.patchDownload+2-2
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
Attached patch adjusts BRIN regression tests to make a non-obvious
dependency on tuple order explicit. Currently, an index-only scan plan
is used by the query that I've adjusted. I'd rather be sure that that
continues.
Here is another patch, this time removing a useless ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE test.
--
Peter Geoghegan
Attachments:
remove-useless-test.patchtext/x-patch; charset=US-ASCII; name=remove-useless-test.patchDownload+0-2
Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
Attached patch adjusts BRIN regression tests to make a non-obvious
dependency on tuple order explicit. Currently, an index-only scan plan
is used by the query that I've adjusted. I'd rather be sure that that
continues.
Applied with a correction: the ordering that was being used was really
"ORDER BY thousand, tenthous" because that's the order of the relevant
index.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
Here is another patch, this time removing a useless ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE test.
Can someone commit this, please?
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
Here is another patch, this time removing a useless ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE test.
Can someone commit this, please?
Removing that test doesn't seem important to me. Why does it seem
important to you?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
Removing that test doesn't seem important to me. Why does it seem
important to you?
It's a minor issue, but it's easily fixed.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
Removing that test doesn't seem important to me. Why does it seem
important to you?It's a minor issue, but it's easily fixed.
And what, in your opinion, is the issue?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
And what, in your opinion, is the issue?
The test does not match the comment above it. It looks like someone
(possibly me) pasted one too many template queries, that were never
appropriately modified to fit the area under consideration.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
And what, in your opinion, is the issue?
The test does not match the comment above it. It looks like someone
(possibly me) pasted one too many template queries, that were never
appropriately modified to fit the area under consideration.
OK, now I understand.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, now I understand.
Thanks.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers