On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 2:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > Great subject line!
>
> fixed ...
>
Thanks for the fix Robert.
This could have been caught, if I have test that creates toast table
using CTAS during development of the patch.
Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia
Robert Haas writes:
> Ack, sorry, I replied on the original thread, not realizing there was
> a second one. Basically, I think the assertion is wrong-headed and
> can be adjusted so it doesn't fail, and I attached a patch over there.
Yeah, I saw. Looks plausible to me, but I haven't studied the
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Great subject line!
>
> fixed ...
Ack, sorry, I replied on the original thread, not realizing there was
a second one. Basically, I think the assertion is wrong-headed and
can be adjusted so it doesn't fail, and I attache
Robert Haas writes:
> Great subject line!
fixed ...
> If I run the regression tests with force_parallel_mode=on prior to the
> parallel hash join patch, they pass. If I run them now, they fail
> inside the parallel hash join tests here:
> create table wide as select generate_series(1, 2) as id,
On 12/21/17 09:32, Andres Freund wrote:
Why mantid's earlier builds don't show the problem, even though I can
locally reproduce the issue escapes me. Todd, did you recently change
anything on Mantid?
Not within the buildfarm set-up. Otherwise, the most recent change was on
Dec. 14 when I ap
Hi,
Err, the subject ought to have been "force parallel mode vs CTAS" or
such.
On 2017-12-21 06:31:06 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi Robert, Todd, All,
>
> I think both I and commit e9baa5e9fa147e are confused.
>
> Mantid started to fail with the parallel hash join c
