Re: [BUGS] Server crash while trying to read expression using pg_get_expr()

From: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [BUGS] Server crash while trying to read expression using pg_get_expr()
Date: 2010-06-15 12:19:19
Message-ID: 0DA83484-7662-4146-9AB3-5571E6732E07@phlo.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

On Jun 15, 2010, at 9:31 , Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> You could avoid changing the meaning of fn_expr by putting the check in the parse analysis phase, into transformFuncCall(). That would feel safer at least for back-branches.

For 9.0, wouldn't a cleaner way to accomplish this be a seperate type for expressions, say pg_expr, instead of storing them as text? With an input function that unconditionally raises and error and no cast to pg_expr, creating new instances of that type would be impossible for normal users. The output function and casts to text would call pg_get_expr() with zero as the second argument.

The internal representation wouldn't change, it's just the type's OID in the catalog that'd be different.

best regards,
Florian Pflug

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2010-06-15 14:07:41 Re: BUG #5507: missing chunk number 0 for toast value XXXXX in pg_toast_XXXXX
Previous Message Maxim Boguk 2010-06-15 10:53:18 Re: BUG #5503: error in trigger function with dropped columns

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2010-06-15 12:37:50 Re: [v9.1] Add security hook on initialization of instance
Previous Message Florian Pflug 2010-06-15 12:05:11 Re: Proposal for 9.1: WAL streaming from WAL buffers