On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:59:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> "Adam, Etienne (Nokia-TECH/Issy Les Moulineaux)" <etienne.a...@nokia.com> >>> writes: >>> > ERROR: XX000: unrecognized node type: 90 >>> > LOCATION: ExecReScan, execAmi.c:284 >>> >>> (gdb) p (NodeTag) 90 >>> $1 = T_GatherMergeState >>> >>> So, apparently somebody wrote ExecReScanGatherMerge, but never bothered >>> to plug it into ExecReScan. > > Attached patch fixes the issue for me. I have locally verified that > the gather merge gets executed in rescan path. I haven't added a test > case for the same as having gather or gather merge on the inner side > of join can be time-consuming. However, if you or others feel that it > is important to have a test to cover this code path, then I can try to > produce one.
Committed. I believe that between this commit and the test-coverage commit from Andres, this open item is reasonably well addressed. If someone thinks more needs to be done, please specify. Thanks. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
