| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong unsafe-flag test in check_output_expressions() |
| Date: | 2026-06-02 20:59:17 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvpb8nHDXF+ZS4BG=k=-4ykVpP6EYtsV7=rjNezun8CrQg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 1 Jun 2026 at 20:27, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I happened to notice $subject when working on a bug-fix near-by.
>
> /* If subquery uses window functions, check point 4 */
> if (subquery->hasWindowFuncs &&
> (safetyInfo->unsafeFlags[tle->resno] &
> UNSAFE_NOTIN_DISTINCTON_CLAUSE) == 0 &&
> !targetIsInAllPartitionLists(tle, subquery))
> {
> /* not present in all PARTITION BY clauses, so mark it unsafe */
> safetyInfo->unsafeFlags[tle->resno] |= UNSAFE_NOTIN_PARTITIONBY_CLAUSE;
> continue;
> }
Yes, that's not intentional. Your proposed fix looks correct. Are you
happy to go ahead with pushing and backpatching that?
Wondering, did you spot that with eyes or tool assist?
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sami Imseih | 2026-06-02 21:05:19 | Re: Vacuumlo improvements |
| Previous Message | Zsolt Parragi | 2026-06-02 20:56:40 | Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion |