Re: "variable not found in subplan target list"

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: "variable not found in subplan target list"
Date: 2023-03-30 10:53:25
Message-ID: 20230330105325.y6uvpalspynf2frt@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2023-Mar-29, Amit Langote wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 3:39 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> > > So I'm back home and found a couple more weird errors in the log:
> >
> > > ERROR: mismatching PartitionPruneInfo found at part_prune_index 0
> > > DETALLE: plan node relids (b 1), pruneinfo relids (b 36)
> >
> > This one reproduces for me.
>
> I've looked into this one and the attached patch fixes it for me.
> Turns out set_plan_refs()'s idea of when the entries from
> PlannerInfo.partPruneInfos are transferred into
> PlannerGlobal.partPruneInfo was wrong.

Thanks for the patch. I've pushed it to github for CI testing, and if
there are no problems I'll put it in.

> Though, I wonder if we need to keep ec386948948 that introduced the
> notion of part_prune_index around if the project that needed it [1]
> has moved on to an entirely different approach altogether, one that
> doesn't require hacking up the pruning code.

Hmm, that's indeed tempting.

--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2023-03-30 11:08:56 Re: Support logical replication of DDLs
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2023-03-30 10:31:47 Re: Support logical replication of DDLs