From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape |
Date: | 2015-07-15 05:38:04 |
Message-ID: | CANP8+jJ5UbynO0ccU+djuLXTurQALRF4kKHqDfPNDBHTe0RU+Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 15 July 2015 at 05:58, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > > If it's
> > > to stay, it *must* get a line-by-line review from some committer-level
> > > person; and I think there are other more important things for us to be
> > > doing for 9.5.
> > >
> >
> > Honestly, I am very surprised by this.
>
> Tom's partial review found quite a crop of unvarnished bugs:
>
> 1. sample node can give different tuples across rescans within an executor
> run
> 2. missing dependency machinery to restrict dropping a sampling extension
> 3. missing "pg_dump --binary-upgrade" treatment
> 4. "potential core dumps due to dereferencing values that could be null"
> 5. factually incorrect comments
> 6. null argument checks in strict functions
> 7. failure to check for constisnull
> 8. "failure to sanity-check" ntuples
> 9. arithmetic errors in random_relative_prime()
>
> (That's after sifting out design counterproposals, feature requests, and
> other
> topics of regular disagreement. I erred on the side of leaving things off
> that list.) Finding one or two like that during a complete post-commit
> review
> would be business as usual. Finding nine in a partial review diagnoses a
> critical shortfall in pre-commit review vigilance. Fixing the bugs found
> to
> date will not cure that shortfall. A qualified re-review could cure it.
>
Thank you for the summary of points. I agree with that list.
I will work on the re-review as you suggest.
1 and 4 relate to the sample API exposed, which needs some rework. We'll
see how big that is; at this time I presume not that hard, but I will wait
for Petr's opinion also when he returns on Friday.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
<http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-07-15 05:50:00 | Re: assessing parallel-safety |
Previous Message | Beena Emerson | 2015-07-15 05:11:56 | Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 |