Re: on placeholder entries in view rule action query's range table

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: on placeholder entries in view rule action query's range table
Date: 2023-04-05 18:33:33
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> While thinking about query view locking in context of [1], I realized
> that we have missed also fixing AcquirePlannerLocks() /
> ScanQueryForLocks() to consider that an RTE_SUBQUERY rte may belong to
> a view, which must be locked the same as RTE_RELATION entries.

I think you're right about that, because AcquirePlannerLocks is supposed
to reacquire whatever locks parsing+rewriting would have gotten.
However, what's with this hunk?

@@ -527,7 +527,7 @@ standard_planner(Query *parse, const char *query_string, int cursorOptions,
result->partPruneInfos = glob->partPruneInfos;
result->rtable = glob->finalrtable;
result->permInfos = glob->finalrteperminfos;
- result->viewRelations = glob->viewRelations;
+ result->viewRelations = NIL;
result->resultRelations = glob->resultRelations;
result->appendRelations = glob->appendRelations;
result->subplans = glob->subplans;

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2023-04-05 18:43:07 Re: GUC for temporarily disabling event triggers
Previous Message Andres Freund 2023-04-05 18:28:35 Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys