On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:40 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 1:53 AM, Etsuro Fujita
>> <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>>> I noticed that this test case added by the patch is not appropriate:
>>> because it doesn't inject extra Sort nodes into EPQ recheck plans, so it
>>> works well without the fix. I modified this to inject a Sort into the
>>> recheck plan of the very first foreign join. Attached is a patch for that.
>
>> Mumble. Tom provided me with that example and said it failed without
>> the patch. I didn't check, I just believed him. But I'm surprised if
>> he was wrong; Tom usually tries to avoid being wrong...
>
> Hm. It did fail as advertised when I connected to the contrib_regression
> database (after installcheck) and entered the query by hand; I
> copied-and-pasted the result of that to show you. It's possible that it
> would not have failed in the particular spot where you chose to insert it
> in the regression script, if for example there were nondefault planner GUC
> settings active at that spot. Did you check that the script produced the
> expected failure against unpatched code?
No. I guess I'll have to go debug this. Argh.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company