| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bryn Llewellyn <bryn(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, pgsql-general list <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Unexpected result from ALTER FUNCTION— looks like a bug |
| Date: | 2022-04-20 03:06:30 |
| Message-ID: | 2713499.1650423990@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:47:07AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>>
>> AFAICT the problem is that SET / RESET part is messing with the
>> HeapTuple, so you can't use the procForm reference afterwards. Simply
>> processing parallel_item before set_items fixes the problem, as in the
>> attached.
> This time with the file.
Yeah, I arrived at the same fix. Another possibility would be to
make the procForm pointer valid again after heap_modify_tuple,
but that seemed like it'd add more code for no really good reason.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-04-20 03:14:31 | Re: Unexpected result from ALTER FUNCTION— looks like a bug |
| Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-04-20 02:49:03 | Re: Unexpected result from ALTER FUNCTION— looks like a bug |