"Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2008/6/1 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> This seems to be correctable with a one-line patch: make SPI_cursor_open
>> set the CONST flag on parameters it puts into the portal (attached).
>> I'm not entirely sure if it's a good idea or not --- comments?

> We can do less invasive patch - it's much more ugly, but don't change
> any other behave. I am afraid, so one-line patch can change behave of
> explain statements in some cases where using variables is correct.

If you can name a case where that is correct, then I'll worry about
this, but offhand I don't see one.

What do you think a "less invasive" patch would be, anyway?  I don't
buy that, say, having SPI_cursor_open_with_args set the flag but
SPI_cursor_open not do so is any safer.  There is no difference between
the two as to what might get executed, so if there's a problem then
both would be at risk.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: explain doesn't work with execute using at 2008-06-01 15:43:48 from Pavel Stehule

Responses

• Re: explain doesn't work with execute using at 2008-06-01 16:07:04 from Pavel Stehule

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Robert Hodges	Date: 2008-06-01 15:58:59
	Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Previous:	From: Pavel Stehule	Date: 2008-06-01 15:43:48
	Subject: Re: explain doesn't work with execute using