| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andrey Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Is it worth adding Assert(false) for unknown paths in print_path()? |
| Date: | 2023-09-28 11:23:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvrNB2maad+O+rUGV1Fzj=WQHiJTXSfQx5KBFDxyfjmbeA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
In [1] Andrey highlighted that I'd forgotten to add print_path()
handling for TidRangePaths in bb437f995.
I know the OPTIMIZER_DEBUG code isn't exactly well used. I never
personally use it and I work quite a bit in the planner, however, if
we're keeping it, I thought maybe we might get the memo of missing
paths a bit sooner if we add an Assert(false) in the default cases.
Is the attached worthwhile?
David
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/379082d6-1b6a-4cd6-9ecf-7157d8c08635@postgrespro.ru
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| assert_fail_unknown_paths_in_print_path.patch | application/octet-stream | 915 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2023-09-28 11:24:58 | Re: Invalidate the subscription worker in cases where a user loses their superuser status |
| Previous Message | Fabrice Chapuis | 2023-09-28 11:11:41 | wal recycling problem |