Re: idea for concurrent seqscans - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: idea for concurrent seqscans
Date
Msg-id 18864.1109393500@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: idea for concurrent seqscans  ("Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>)
Responses Re: idea for concurrent seqscans  ("Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>)
Re: idea for concurrent seqscans  ("Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> writes:
>> but I also hate to burden the developers with rewriting a lot of
>> regression tests when their time could be better spent elsewhere.

> Certainly, but I suspect it's just a matter of adding ORDER BY to
> everything, which just about anyone (even myself!) should be able to do.

Performance is not the issue; test coverage, however, is an issue.
See the comment at the end of
http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/regress-evaluation.html#AEN22383
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Hoffmann
Date:
Subject: Re: Development Plans
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: idea for concurrent seqscans