From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: some last patches breaks plan cache |
Date: | 2018-03-31 18:28:31 |
Message-ID: | 985ee70a-cb9a-c11c-2ec0-592b5a5f542c@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/31/2018 07:56 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 03/31/2018 07:38 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE public.proc(a integer, INOUT b integer, c
>> integer)
>> LANGUAGE plpgsql
>> AS $procedure$
>> begin
>> b := a + c;
>> end;
>> $procedure$
>>
>> CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE public.testproc()
>> LANGUAGE plpgsql
>> AS $procedure$
>> declare r int;
>> begin
>> call proc(10, r, 20);
>> end;
>> $procedure$
>>
>> postgres=# call testproc();
>> CALL
>> postgres=# call testproc();
>> ERROR: SPI_execute_plan_with_paramlist failed executing query "CALL
>> proc(10, r, 20)": SPI_ERROR_ARGUMENT
>> CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function testproc() line 4 at CALL
>> postgres=#
>>
>> second call fails
>
> Yeah.
>
> d92bc83c48bdea9888e64cf1e2edbac9693099c9 seems to have broken this :-/
>
FWIW it seems the issue is somewhere in exec_stmt_call, which does this:
/*
* Don't save the plan if not in atomic context. Otherwise,
* transaction ends would cause warnings about plan leaks.
*/
exec_prepare_plan(estate, expr, 0, estate->atomic);
When executed outside transaction, CALL has estate->atomic=false, and so
calls exec_prepare_plan() with keepplan=false. And on the second call it
gets bogus Plan, of course (with the usual 0x7f7f7f7f7f7f7f7f patterns).
When in a transaction, it sets keepplan=true, and everything works fine.
So either estate->atomic is not sufficient on it's own, or we need to
reset the expr->plan somewhere.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-03-31 20:43:52 | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-03-31 18:27:14 | Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification |