BUG #19023: Table DDL default column expression depending on temp objects

From: PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: BUG #19023: Table DDL default column expression depending on temp objects
Date: 2025-08-18 13:32:24
Message-ID: 19023-0a5a85a44ec3f0c6@postgresql.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference: 19023
Logged by: Kirill Reshke
Email address: reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com
PostgreSQL version: 18beta3
Operating system: any
Description:

I have found two cases when user can define a relation, which has temp
objects in its DEFAULT expression.
First example is:
```
reshke=# create temp sequence s1;
CREATE SEQUENCE
reshke=# create table tt(i int default nextval('s1'));
CREATE TABLE
```
I think it is a bug that PostgreSQL allows this DDL to successfully
complete. There is a validation for this type of DDL already, example:
```
reshke=# create table ttx(i int default nextval('s3'));
ERROR: relation "s3" does not exist
LINE 1: create table ttx(i int default nextval('s3'));
^

```

Since PostgreSQL already checks for its nextval() input, we can teach server
to also validate relation relpersistence, arent we?

Second example is with tables:
```
reshke=# create temp table x();
CREATE TABLE
reshke=# create table y (i int default nextval('x'));
CREATE TABLE
reshke=# insert into y default values ;
ERROR: cannot open relation "x"
DETAIL: This operation is not supported for tables.

```

WDYT? Is this indeed a bug?

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-08-18 14:05:55 Re: BUG #19023: Table DDL default column expression depending on temp objects
Previous Message Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) 2025-08-18 11:51:45 RE: Lock timeouts and unusual spikes in replication lag with logical parallel transaction streaming