Re: BUG #18422: Assert in expandTupleDesc() fails on row mismatch with additional SRF
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18422: Assert in expandTupleDesc() fails on row mismatch with additional SRF |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 170712.1712844795@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #18422: Assert in expandTupleDesc() fails on row mismatch with additional SRF (Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #18422: Assert in expandTupleDesc() fails on row mismatch with additional SRF
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 10:16 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Wilco. Another thing I was considering, but didn't pull the trigger >> on in the draft patch, was to introduce a funcapi.c function on the >> order of >> get_expr_result_rtfunc(RangeTblFunction *rtfunc, ...) >> which would encapsulate applying either BuildDescFromLists or >> get_expr_result_type. > Do you think we can have a parameter in the new get_expr_result_rtfunc() > function to indicate whether we want to build an intermediate tupdesc > when we have a coldeflist? Then we can set it to true in the two places > that are correct already, and set it to false at the places we need to > fix. But I'm not sure if including such a new parameter would be an > improvement or just make it worse. I did think about that, but it seems mighty weird. The semantics of the flag would have to be something like "I want a tupdesc when the result type is COMPOSITE, but not when it's RECORD", which seems rather arbitrary. Perhaps it'd be sufficient to add a note to the header comment of get_expr_result_type warning about when not to use it. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: