Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Bug with view definitions?

From: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
To: Justin Clift <jc(at)telstra(dot)net>
Cc: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>,PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Bug with view definitions?
Date: 2004-07-01 18:13:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Justin Clift wrote:

> Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> <snip>
>> I've still not checked any code. I don't even know what part of pg it 
>> is that produce that bad SQL. The view itself works, so it must be 
>> the pretty printer that is broken (where ever that is hidden away in 
>> the code).
> Thanks Dennis.
> So, it's definitely a bug then.  I wasn't sure if it was PG or me.  :) 

The source of information_schema.constraint_column_usage  in 
backend/catalog/information_schema.sql doesn't have the ORDER BY clause, 
but pg_get_viewdef finds one. A quick glance at adt/ruleutils.c doesn't 
show an obvious problem, so the inner query somehow acquired a sortClause.


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Michael MeskesDate: 2004-07-01 18:34:15
Subject: Re: ecpg glitch in CVS tip
Previous:From: Jeroen T. VermeulenDate: 2004-07-01 18:10:31
Subject: Re: [Re] Re: PREPARE and transactions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group