From: | Lowell Hought <lowell(dot)hought(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18950: pgsql function that worked in Postgresql 16 does not return in Postgresql 17 |
Date: | 2025-06-08 02:59:39 |
Message-ID: | CAJtAGPrcK_gp8FuEzp4tTbLKD1mqFGY5yDk0FX_1AGDjVJXAuw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Wait, I spoke too soon. When I just ran the query I was on version 16.
Give me a moment to shut down 16 and fire up 17 and I will try it again.
Lowell
On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 9:57 PM Lowell Hought <lowell(dot)hought(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> Yes! I just changed the parameter as you suggested and the query
> returned as expected.
> So I guess something changed between version 16 and version 17? Perhaps
> the default for that setting?
>
> Lowell
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 9:08 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> Lowell Hought <lowell(dot)hought(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > If I run the query outside of the function it works as expected. But
>> the function never returns.
>>
>> This isn't that surprising either: a query inside a function is
>> often translated into a "generic" plan that doesn't depend on
>> specific parameter values, typically sacrificing runtime to
>> avoid repeated planning. Does it get any better if you do
>> "set plan_cache_mode = force_custom_plan" before running the
>> function?
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-06-08 03:02:48 | Re: BUG #18950: pgsql function that worked in Postgresql 16 does not return in Postgresql 17 |
Previous Message | Lowell Hought | 2025-06-08 02:57:27 | Re: BUG #18950: pgsql function that worked in Postgresql 16 does not return in Postgresql 17 |