Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy
Date: 2024-02-15 16:28:23
Message-ID: 3263261.1708014503@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> The following query:
> CREATE TABLE t (b bool, i int) PARTITION BY RANGE (b, i);
> CREATE TABLE tp PARTITION OF t FOR VALUES FROM (false, 0) TO (false, 1);
> SELECT * FROM t WHERE b IS NOT true;
> fails with ERROR: invalid strategy number 0.
> Reproduced on REL_12_STABLE .. master.
> The first bad commit for this anomaly is e0693faf7.

What seems to be happening is that gen_prune_step_op is getting
op_is_ne = true and doing this:

/*
* For clauses that contain an <> operator, set opstrategy to
* InvalidStrategy to signal get_matching_list_bounds to do the right
* thing.
*/
opstep->opstrategy = op_is_ne ? InvalidStrategy : opstrategy;

but then we're failing in get_matching_range_bounds, ie somebody
taught get_matching_list_bounds to do the right thing but not
any of the other code paths.

I'm also wondering how we got there in the first place. It looks like
match_boolean_partition_clause thinks it can translate "b IS NOT true"
to "b <> true", which is flat wrong --- it gives the wrong result for
null.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kline 2024-02-15 16:29:32 Re: BUG #18343: Incorrect description in postgresql.conf for max_parallel_workers_per_gather
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2024-02-15 16:10:00 Re: BUG #18343: Incorrect description in postgresql.conf for max_parallel_workers_per_gather