Re: Consistent segfault in complex query

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

>> So I can see exactly where the problem is, but I'm not sure what the
>> solution should be.

>> EvalPlanQualStart copies the param_exec value list explicitly _not_
>> including the execPlan link, which obviously isn't going to work if
>> the value has not been computed yet. Should it be forcing the
>> evaluation of initplans that haven't been run yet, or should the EPQ
>> scan evaluate them itself from a copy of the plan, or does there
>> need to be some way to share state? (having the InitPlan be run more
>> than once might be a problem?)

Tom> The second of those; what we need is for any referenced InitPlans
Tom> to be executed afresh under EPQ rules. (I'm not entirely sure that
Tom> an InitPlan could need to see different input tuples under EPQ
Tom> than it'd see otherwise, but I'm not sure it couldn't, either.)

Obviously you know this code better than I do... but I'm not convinced.

Shouldn't the InitPlan pretty much by definition be independent of the
tuples being locked/updated?

And doesn't executing them again run the risk of getting a different
value for other reasons, for example if an initplan is volatile?

What I'm wondering is whether the param in the copied estate shouldn't
rather be just a proxy for the one in the original estate - if we need
to evaluate it, then do so in the original estate, store the value
there, and copy the value back into the EPQ plantree.

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)