From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: assertion failure w/extended query protocol |
Date: | 2012-10-19 22:46:10 |
Message-ID: | 201210200046.15296.andres@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday, October 20, 2012 12:37:54 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > So as far as I can see the new logic is correct? A quick look & test
> > seems to confirm that.
>
> I think the real problem here is just that the code was trying to be too
> specific, and while your version might be more correct it's not doing
> anything to fix that misjudgment. We should just make the
> CreateTableAsStmt case look like the ExplainStmt case, viz
>
> Assert(IsA(qry, Query));
> if (qry->commandType == CMD_UTILITY)
> return UtilityContainsQuery(qry->utilityStmt);
> return qry;
FWIW commit + general principle looks good to me.
Andres
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-10-19 22:55:02 | Re: Always include encoding of database in pg_dumpall |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-10-19 22:37:54 | Re: assertion failure w/extended query protocol |