Re: enable_incremental_sort changes query behavior

On 12/16/20 1:51 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:08 AM Anastasia Lubennikova
> <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>>
>> On 01.12.2020 03:08, James Coleman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 4:39 PM Tomas Vondra
>>> <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> I've pushed the 0001 part, i.e. the main fix. Not sure about the other
>>>> parts (comments and moving the code back to postgres_fdw) yet.
>>> I noticed the CF entry [1] got moved to the next CF; I'm thinking this
>>> entry should be marked as committed since the fix for the initial bug
>>> reported on this thread has been pushed. We have the parallel safety
>>> issue outstanding, but there's a separate thread and patch for that,
>>> so I'll make a new CF entry for that.
>>>
>>> I can mark it as committed, but I'm not sure how to "undo" (or if
>>> that's desirable) the move to the next CF.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>> 1: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/30/2754/
>>>
>>>
>> Oops...
>> I must have rushed with this one, thank you for noticing.
>> I don't see how to move it back either. I think it's fine to mark it as
>> Committed where it is now.
>>
>
> BTW, I still see this one as needs review
>

Hmm, not sure what was the plan, but I'll mark it as committed once I
push the remaining patches (for parallel-safe checks, SRFs etc.) in a
couple days.

regards

--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company