| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: fill_extraUpdatedCols is done in completely the wrong place | 
| Date: | 2020-05-18 14:54:06 | 
| Message-ID: | 989410e6-1da7-d763-e8cf-f4a3d999db94@2ndquadrant.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On 2020-05-08 21:05, Tom Lane wrote:
> I happened to notice $subject while working on the release notes.
> AFAICS, it is 100% inappropriate for the parser to compute the
> set of generated columns affected by an UPDATE, because that set
> could change before execution.  It would be really easy to break
> this for an UPDATE in a stored rule, for example.
Do you have a specific situation in mind?  How would a rule change the 
set of columns updated by a query?  Something involving CTEs?  Having a 
test case would be good.
> I think that that processing should be done by the planner, instead.
> I don't object too much to keeping the data in RTEs ... but there had
> better be a bold annotation that the set is not valid till after
> planning.
> 
> An alternative solution is to keep the set in some executor data structure
> and compute it during executor startup; perhaps near to where the
> expressions are prepared for execution, so as to save extra stringToNode
> calls.
Yeah, really only the executor ended up needing this, so perhaps it 
should be handled in the executor.
-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vik Fearing | 2020-05-18 15:02:34 | Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators? | 
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-05-18 14:42:18 | factorial function/phase out postfix operators? |