Re: Possible bug in CASE evaluation

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Possible bug in CASE evaluation
Date: 2013-06-22 14:54:50
Message-ID: 20130622145450.GC1254@alap2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2013-06-21 16:45:28 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-06-21 09:51:05 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > That being said, if we discover a simple-enough fix that performs well, we may
> > as well incorporate it.
>
> What about passing another parameter down eval_const_expressions_mutator
> (which is static, so changing the API isn't a problem) that basically
> tells us whether we actually should evaluate expressions or just perform
> the transformation?
> There's seems to be basically a couple of places where we call dangerous
> things:
> * simplify_function (via ->evaluate_function->evaluate_expr) which is
> called in a bunch of places
> * evaluate_expr which is directly called in T_ArrayExpr
> T_ArrayCoerceExpr
>
> All places I've inspected so far need to deal with simplify_function
> returning NULL anyway, so that seems like a viable fix.

*Prototype* patch - that seems simple enough - attached. Opinions?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Don-t-evaluate-potentially-unreachable-parts-of-CASE.patch text/x-patch 5.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2013-06-22 15:03:49 Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-06-22 14:08:51 Re: Implementing incremental backup