BUG #17859: Suspected collation conflict when using recursive query
От | PG Bug reporting form |
---|---|
Тема | BUG #17859: Suspected collation conflict when using recursive query |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 17859-c530b7716e786d04@postgresql.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #17859: Suspected collation conflict when using recursive query
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 17859 Logged by: Jiangshan Liu Email address: jiangshan.liu@tju.edu.cn PostgreSQL version: 15.2 Operating system: Ubuntu 18.04.6 LTS Description: Dear PostgreSQL developers, I encountered an error while executing a recursive query in PostgreSQL and would like to report it. The query is as follows: WITH RECURSIVE run(n, t) AS ( SELECT 1, ''::text UNION ALL SELECT n + 1, (SELECT (select tableowner FROM pg_tables LIMIT 1)::text) FROM run WHERE n < 5 ) SELECT * FROM run; The error message is > ERROR: recursive query "run" column 2 has collation "default" in non-recursive term but collation "C" overall LINE 2: SELECT 1, ''::text ^ HINT: Use the COLLATE clause to set the collation of the non-recursive term. In fact, the collation of column "tableowner" in table "pg_tables" is "C". SELECT column_name, collation_name FROM information_schema.columns WHERE table_name = 'pg_tables' AND column_name = 'tableowner'; column_name | collation_name -------------+---------------- tableowner | C I would like to inquire if this error is caused by a bug in the recursive query implementation. According to the PostgreSQL documentation, the collation of the result should be the non-default collation if any non-default collation is present[1]. In this case, since the collation of column 2 is "C", the collation of the result should also be "C". However, the error suggests otherwise. Furthermore, I noticed that the same behavior works in a non-recursive query: SELECT 1, ''::text UNION ALL SELECT 2, (SELECT (select tableowner FROM pg_tables LIMIT 1)::text); The documentation mentions that the collation of the input expression is used when the database system has to perform an ordering or a character classification[2]. However, the recursive query does not use any additional ordering or character classification on the second column, and I couldn't find any relevant information in the documentation. I appreciate your attention to this matter and apologize if I made any mistakes in my analysis. Thank you for your time and effort in maintaining PostgreSQL. Best regards, Jiangshan Liu [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/collation.html#:~:text=If%20any%20non%2Ddefault%20collation%20is%20present%2C%20that%20is%20the%20result%20of%20the%20collation%20combination [2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/collation.html#:~:text=When%20the%20database%20system%20has%20to%20perform%20an%20ordering%20or%20a%20character%20classification%2C%20it%20uses%20the%20collation%20of%20the%20input%20expression
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: