Subject: Re: enable_incremental_sort changes query behavior
To: James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>,
 Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jaime.casanova@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
References: 
 <CAAaqYe8_Y7Ydfwdr_q0NWCpr+E_Hc_e=ScEhi9MUmuLT45cNDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAaqYe9C3f6A_tZCRfr9Dm7hPpgGwpp4i-K_=NS9GWXuNiFANg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAaqYe80-V8q7PozVh22EbBhMDU40W286na3RahxJiZ-Pz8S2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJGNTeNjGZYFBjFv055aFgkeAurAOVVe2xp7XB1V4Qd3de8Fuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAaqYe8e9A9SC1BgWPgzyL+v8uC-=y2+yQ0z6CTXBTy1gxjvyg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201029220652.glf4xk2p7wkfisb6@development>
 <CAAaqYe9P261NfjqhAkDbPGEjqf_8ZyayxTYUEdEnPOqmLRb6EA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201030210316.cbwv4arwp4lcfgx2@development>
 <CAAaqYe_izhFTq1FLgUxa+J+_bY8FGBNiHjTj=EzrSA72tvacEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201103023743.sswkl6h74dkbcfmp@development>
 <20201103213942.sj3qohewdshrw4oz@development>
 <CAAaqYe8bEA_dqGm0XB=95VM7Fab+4xDvKdYA2YP65KsBQi6GAQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>
Message-ID: <87bfc0bb-34c3-b3fe-7674-0220055fabaa@postgrespro.ru>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 12:08:26 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAaqYe8bEA_dqGm0XB=95VM7Fab+4xDvKdYA2YP65KsBQi6GAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk

On 01.12.2020 03:08, James Coleman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 4:39 PM Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> I've pushed the 0001 part, i.e. the main fix. Not sure about the other
>> parts (comments and moving the code back to postgres_fdw) yet.
> I noticed the CF entry [1] got moved to the next CF; I'm thinking this
> entry should be marked as committed since the fix for the initial bug
> reported on this thread has been pushed. We have the parallel safety
> issue outstanding, but there's a separate thread and patch for that,
> so I'll make a new CF entry for that.
>
> I can mark it as committed, but I'm not sure how to "undo" (or if
> that's desirable) the move to the next CF.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> James
>
> 1: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/30/2754/
>
>
Oops...
I must have rushed with this one, thank you for noticing.
I don't see how to move it back either. I think it's fine to mark it as 
Committed where it is now.

-- 
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company