| From: | Dirkjan Bussink <d(dot)bussink(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Server crash when describing a FETCH statement after its cursor is closed |
| Date: | 2026-09-26 07:23:42 |
| Message-ID: | 7E0B8F9A-063B-4CBE-91C2-D986EDD8B45B@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
> On 25 Sep 2026, at 16:33, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> I'm not convinced by this blithe assertion "not our business to raise
> error". The adjacent case for ExecuteStmt *will* raise an error if
> it can't find the prepared statement; why shouldn't this case act like
> that one? IOW, the sequence of client operations that you show is
> invalid, and I think we ought to push back on that accordingly.
Alright, here is a patch that now explicit returns an error when the portal
is already closed, matching what ExecuteStmt does.
--
Cheers,
Dirkjan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-Fix-crash-when-describing-a-FETCH-statement-wh.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2026-09-26 09:14:12 | Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication |
| Previous Message | Nikhil Kumar Veldanda | 2026-09-26 05:21:26 | Re: ZSTD TOAST compression, and an extensible compression method encoding |