From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | samuel(dot)horwitz(at)gmail(dot)com, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #14876: Segmentation fault with JSONB column used in store proc that gets used by view and later altered |
Date: | 2017-10-28 03:14:56 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQbrWGzzRXXZWm34Mk2k1OPABU7fDwwRTTZpnGtHJAUpA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Sorry for coming up late in the game. I can see that you have pushed a
>> patch as d5b760e, but back-paddled a bit on d76886c. After some
>> analysis of things around, I think that you got it right. One comment
>> I have first though is that you could have used forboth as there is no
>> point to go through the target list entries once there are no more
>> aliases. Or target list entries marked as resjunk do not have an
>> expended reference name?
>
> Right, there's no entry in the outer RTE for resjunk columns.
>
> (In practice, resjunk entries are at the end of the tlist so that it
> wouldn't really matter, but I try to keep code from assuming that.)
OK, thanks for confirming. Yes the current logic is better this way.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-10-28 03:56:57 | Re: BUG #14874: Dublicate values in primary key |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-10-28 02:06:47 | Re: BUG #14874: Dublicate values in primary key |