Hi! On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 20:22, Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 7:20 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> writes: > > > I'd like to add that float4.out not only assumes that insert-ordering is > > > preserved (this could be more-or-less portable between table AMs). It > > > also > > > assumes the way UPDATE moves updated rows. That seems quite > > > heap-specific. You can see in the following fragment, updated rows jump > > > to > > > the bottom. > > > > I'd be willing to consider a policy that we don't want to depend on > > exactly where UPDATE moves rows to. The proposed patch is not that, > > however. > > OK, that makes sense for me.
Thanks for this input! This was my first intention to fix only the test that was affected by UPDATE-order specifics, broke when runnung on an extension AM. Maybe I was too liberal and added ORDER BY's more than needed. I definitely agree to the proposal. Please find attached v2 that fixes only UPDATE-specific part of float4/float8 test.
v2-0001-Fortify-float4-and-float8-regression-tests-agains.patch
Description: Binary data
