Re: Buglets in equivclass.c

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Buglets in equivclass.c
Date: 2020-10-05 17:17:27
Message-ID: 1786355.1601918247@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 at 06:29, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I'm unsure whether to back-patch either of these. They both seem to be
>> just latent bugs so far as the core code is concerned, but the first one
>> in particular seems like something that could bite extension code.
>> Thoughts?

> That's a good question. I'm leaning towards backpatching both of them.
> The 2nd is new as of v13, so it does not seem unreasonable that
> someone has just not yet stumbled on it with some extension that adds
> extra child ECs. I can imagine a use case for that, by getting rid of
> needless equality quals that duplicate the partition constraint. The
> fix for the first just seems neater/faster/correct, so I can't really
> see any reason not to backpatch it.

Yeah, that's my conclusion too after sleeping on it. Pushed,
thanks for reviewing.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2020-10-05 18:02:34 Re: "cert" + clientcert=verify-ca in pg_hba.conf?
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2020-10-05 16:24:15 Re: Support for OUT parameters in procedures