Re: A gap in preventing bogus parameterizations in a798660ebe3

From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
To: Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: A gap in preventing bogus parameterizations in a798660ebe3
Date: 2026-11-02 11:01:11
Message-ID: auhqA2rjLqtZzisa@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2026-Nov-02, Tender Wang wrote:

> As you noted, adding a field to JoinPathExtraData raises an ABI
> concern, so that version of the fix might need to be master-only.

But nothing allocates JoinPathExtraData anywhere except
add_paths_to_joinrel in its stack; everybody else just receives a
pointer to that. Even the hooks for it receive it as a pointer. I
think the ABI concern is overblown in this case; just make sure to add
the new field at the end.

--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Find a bug in a program, and fix it, and the program will work today.
Show the program how to find and fix a bug, and the program
will work forever" (Oliver Silfridge)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2026-11-02 11:01:46 Re: WAL record CRC calculated incorrectly because of underlying buffer modification
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2026-11-02 10:49:18 Re: Add counted_by attribute