From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, christopher(dot)m(dot)hanks(at)gmail(dot)com, PostgreSQL Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #14220: pg_get_expr() with an incorrect relation id crashes the server |
Date: | 2016-07-01 14:32:33 |
Message-ID: | 18868.1467383553@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I have poked at this bug report yesterday and today, and found that it
> is as well possible to hit the second assertion two lines below with a
> dropped column. So I would like to propose the patch attached to
> replace both assertions with an elog(ERROR).
There's a quite similar error check just a few lines above that prints
elog(ERROR, "bogus varattno for subquery var: %d", var->varattno);
I'm not necessarily wedded to that exact phrasing, but I think these new
error messages should be consistent with that one. I'm a bit inclined
to make all three of them read like
elog(ERROR, "invalid attnum %d for table \"%s\"",
attnum, rte->eref->aliasname);
> Test cases are included,
> though I am not sure if they bring much value.
Yeah, I can't get very excited about memorializing those.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2016-07-01 14:50:55 | Re: BUG #14221: using postgresql 9.1.22 to 9.3.13 failed using pg_upgrade |
Previous Message | pange.akshaya | 2016-07-01 12:54:21 | BUG #14222: psqlODBC driver connection pooling not working for .net codebase |