Re: Assert failure of the cross-check for nullingrels

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Assert failure of the cross-check for nullingrels
Date: 2023-06-06 20:22:30
Message-ID: 228188.1686082950@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> So, is this done? I see that you made other commits fixing related code
> several days after this email, but none seems to match the changes you
> posted in this patch; and also it's not clear to me that there's any
> test case where this patch is expected to change behavior. (So there's
> also a question of whether this is a bug fix or rather some icying on
> cake.)

Well, the bugs I was aware of ahead of PGCon are all fixed, but there
are some new reports I still have to deal with. I left the existing
open issue open, but maybe it'd be better to close it and start a new
one?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2023-06-06 20:37:26 Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-06-06 20:20:40 Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction