Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Melanie Plageman
Subject Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join
Date
Msg-id CAAKRu_YhMjbGgLJyyc_SGYTWx3nBuMnhYPxhxZvuCTbuRxAd=g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 11:24 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 05:16:12PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 8:05 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> Considering that this is a parallel plan, I don't think there's any
> >> mystery about why an ORDER-BY-less query might have unstable output
> >> order; the only mystery is why more of the buildfarm hasn't failed.
> >> Can we just add "ORDER BY t1.id" to this query?  It looks like you
> >> get the same PHJ plan, although now underneath Sort/Gather Merge.
> >
> > Yes, this was an oversight on my part. Attached is the patch that does
> > just what you suggested.
>
> Confirmed that adding an ORDER BY adds a Sort node between a Gather
> Merge and a Parallel Hash Full Join, not removing coverage.
>
> This has fallen through the cracks and conchuela has failed again
> today, so I went ahead and applied the fix on HEAD.  Thanks!

Thanks!



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: ERROR: wrong varnullingrels (b 3) (expected (b)) for Var 2/1
Next
From: Melanie Plageman
Date:
Subject: Re: Major pgbench synthetic SELECT workload regression, Ubuntu 23.04+PG15