From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Bugs in planner's equivalence-class processing |
Date: | 2012-10-17 21:02:50 |
Message-ID: | 20121017210250.GB19159@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:56:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Is anybody concerned about the compatibility implications of fixing this
> bug in the back branches? I'm worried about people complaining that we
> broke their application in a minor release. Maybe they were depending
> on incorrect behavior, but they might complain anyway. On the other
> hand, the fact that this hasn't been reported from the field in nine
> years suggests that not many people write queries like this.
Nice detective work. I'd personally say that it should be fixed. I
personally haven't written these kinds of queries so I'm not affected,
but I don't like the idea of known bugs being unfixed.
It's a pity we can't have a system that can somehow independantly
checks the results of the planner....
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> He who writes carelessly confesses thereby at the very outset that he does
> not attach much importance to his own thoughts.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2012-10-17 21:42:39 | Re: [RFC] CREATE QUEUE (log-only table) for londiste/pgQ ccompatibility |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2012-10-17 20:52:38 | Re: Bugs in CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY |