From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: When do we lose column names? |
Date: | 2012-02-07 19:45:10 |
Message-ID: | 4F317F46.60409@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/07/2012 12:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 11/16/2011 10:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Upon further review, this patch would need some more work even for the
>>> RowExpr case, because there are several places that build RowExprs
>>> without bothering to build a valid colnames list. It's clearly soluble
>>> if anyone cares to put in the work, but I'm not personally excited
>>> enough to pursue it ...
>> The patch itself causes a core dump with the current regression tests.
> Yeah, observing that was what made me write the above.
>
>> I've been looking at the other places that build RowExprs. Most of them
>> look OK and none seem clearly in need of fixing at first glance. Which
>> do you think need attention?
> In general I think we'd have to require that colnames be supplied in all
> RowExprs if we go this way. Anyplace that's trying to slide by without
> will have to be fixed. I don't recall how many places that is.
I just had a thought that maybe we could make this simpler by dummying
up a list of colnames if we don't have one, instead of that assertion.
Or am I on the wrong track.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-02-07 19:56:07 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?! |
Previous Message | Jay Levitt | 2012-02-07 19:39:07 | Re: Progress on fast path sorting, btree index creation time |