Re: BUG #18059: Unexpected error 25001 in stored procedure

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: paul(dot)kulakov(at)systematica(dot)ru, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #18059: Unexpected error 25001 in stored procedure
Date: 2023-08-21 13:32:27
Message-ID: CA+Tgmoa2dBm7=6H986FEynqv=tHdxvXt5HVYuO24TC97G4HkkA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> What I'm inclined to propose, therefore, is that we make revalidation
> be a no-op for every statement type for which transformStmt() reaches
> its default: case. (When it does so, the resulting CMD_UTILITY Query
> will not get any processing from the rewriter or planner either.)
> That gives us this list of statements requiring revalidation:
>
> case T_InsertStmt:
> case T_DeleteStmt:
> case T_UpdateStmt:
> case T_MergeStmt:
> case T_SelectStmt:
> case T_ReturnStmt:
> case T_PLAssignStmt:
> case T_DeclareCursorStmt:
> case T_ExplainStmt:
> case T_CreateTableAsStmt:
> case T_CallStmt:

That sounds like the right thing. It is perhaps unfortunate that we
don't have a proper parse analysis/execution distinction for other
types of statements, but if that ever changes then this can be
revisited.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2023-08-21 13:37:16 Re: BUG #18055: logical decoding core on AllocateSnapshotBuilder()
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2023-08-21 12:41:46 Re: BUG #18055: logical decoding core on AllocateSnapshotBuilder()

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Önder Kalacı 2023-08-21 13:34:24 Re: postgres_fdw: wrong results with self join + enable_nestloop off
Previous Message Robert Haas 2023-08-21 13:27:51 Re: Logging of matching pg_hba.conf entry during auth skips trust auth, potential security issue