| From: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rahul <rahul(at)rhyadav(dot)dev>, Alexandra Wang <alexandra(dot)wang(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Samuel Olaoye <dapsalmy(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong results: hashed SubPlan referenced twice after OR-qual extraction reuses a stale hash table (13 to 19beta4) |
| Date: | 2026-11-02 05:51:25 |
| Message-ID: | CAMbWs4-AXHY1Lfnj4pxQ8yudHRSCYsU1mQQ+vJgZteYZs4WAiA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Sat, Oct 31, 2026 at 1:49 PM shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> v3 looks right to me. Each reference gets its own flag, so the
> rescan order does not matter.
>
> I did some experiment on your patch and also tested JIT on it, everything
> looks good
I've pushed this and back-patched it to v14.
In the back branches the new field fits into existing padding in
SubPlanState, so the struct size and the offsets of its other members
don't change. I checked this with abidiff locally. But I guess the
buildfarm's abi-compliance-check will still report the change, so I'm
waiting for those results and will then update .abi-compliance-history
in the back branches.
- Richard
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Guo | 2026-11-02 07:06:43 | Re: Wrong results: hashed SubPlan referenced twice after OR-qual extraction reuses a stale hash table (13 to 19beta4) |
| Previous Message | shihao zhong | 2026-11-02 05:19:14 | Re: BUG #19408: Bad plan for UNION ALL subquery with outer WHERE, ORDER BY, LIMIT, and separate indexes |