On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 1:27 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 1:20 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> > > I wonder what caused this[1] one-off failure to see tuples in clustered order:
> > > ...
> > > I guess a synchronised scan could cause that, but I wouldn't expect one here.
> >
> > Looking at its configuration, chipmunk uses
> >
> > 'extra_config' => {
> > ...
> > 'shared_buffers = 10MB',
Ahh, I see what's happening. You don't need a concurrent process
scanning *your* table for scan order to be nondeterministic. The
preceding CLUSTER command can leave the start block anywhere if its
call to ss_report_location() fails to acquire SyncScanLock
conditionally. So I think we just need to disable that for this test,
like in the attached.
