From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #16801: Invalid memory access on WITH RECURSIVE with nested WITHs |
Date: | 2021-02-25 02:17:09 |
Message-ID: | YDcIpSa8c+Lrm9m6@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 10:30:41AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Your patch does not have a test for that, but it fixes the list
> handling. With more nested levels and some UNIONs, the patch I sent
> previously would equally break, though I am not sure we need more than
> what I am sending here. What do you think about this extra test?
By the way, here is a fancier test case to make the list handling
recurse much more in checkWellFormedRecursionWalker():
WITH RECURSIVE outermost(x) AS (
SELECT 1
UNION (WITH innermost1 AS (
SELECT 2
UNION (WITH innermost2 AS (
SELECT 3
UNION (WITH innermost3 AS (
SELECT 4
UNION (WITH innermost4 AS (
SELECT 5
UNION (WITH innermost5 AS (SELECT 6)
SELECT * FROM innermost5))
SELECT * FROM innermost4))
SELECT * FROM innermost3))
SELECT * FROM innermost2))
SELECT * FROM outermost
UNION SELECT * FROM innermost1)
)
SELECT * FROM outermost ORDER BY 1;
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-02-25 02:30:36 | Re: BUG #16801: Invalid memory access on WITH RECURSIVE with nested WITHs |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-02-25 02:13:46 | Re: BUG #16801: Invalid memory access on WITH RECURSIVE with nested WITHs |