Queries results don't have a guaranteed order.

[desa]

Bug report

Version: master@bf0ac92 confirmed that the behavior also existed in 0.11.
OS: OSX

The order that data is returned by a query isn't stable.

> select * from average_temperature limit 10
name: average_temperature
-------------------------
time            degrees location
1439856000000000000 82  coyote_creek
1439856000000000000 85  santa_monica
1439856360000000000 73  coyote_creek
1439856360000000000 74  santa_monica
1439856720000000000 86  coyote_creek
1439856720000000000 80  santa_monica
1439857080000000000 89  coyote_creek
1439857080000000000 81  santa_monica
1439857440000000000 77  coyote_creek
1439857440000000000 81  santa_monica

> select * from average_temperature limit 10
name: average_temperature
-------------------------
time            degrees location
1439856000000000000 85  santa_monica
1439856000000000000 82  coyote_creek
1439856360000000000 74  santa_monica
1439856360000000000 73  coyote_creek
1439856720000000000 80  santa_monica
1439856720000000000 86  coyote_creek
1439857080000000000 81  santa_monica
1439857080000000000 89  coyote_creek
1439857440000000000 81  santa_monica
1439857440000000000 77  coyote_creek

Steps to reproduce:

1. Clone and Install influx-spec
2. Run influx-spec data mock_data_dir/ and repeat simple_select returns a failure.
3. Or run influx-spec data mock_data_dir/.
4. Using the simple_select database, repeatedly issue the query select * from average_temperature limit 10.

Expected behavior: [What you expected to happen]
Query results should have a stable ordering.

> select * from average_temperature limit 10
name: average_temperature
-------------------------
time            degrees location
1439856000000000000 82  coyote_creek
1439856000000000000 85  santa_monica
1439856360000000000 73  coyote_creek
1439856360000000000 74  santa_monica
1439856720000000000 86  coyote_creek
1439856720000000000 80  santa_monica
1439857080000000000 89  coyote_creek
1439857080000000000 81  santa_monica
1439857440000000000 77  coyote_creek
1439857440000000000 81  santa_monica

[mark-rushakoff]

It looks like the inconsistency in result ordering was a combination of the dataset used and the bug in issue #7482 which has been fixed. Queried data is consistent as of #7484 being merged.