Re: BUG #14322: Possible inconsistent behavior with timestamp_to_str()
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #14322: Possible inconsistent behavior with timestamp_to_str() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20160910000204.mbbfdxtw4t4oelzs@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BUG #14322: Possible inconsistent behavior with timestamp_to_str() (keith@keithf4.com) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #14322: Possible inconsistent behavior with timestamp_to_str()
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 2016-09-09 23:54:48 +0000, keith@keithf4.com wrote: > The following bug has been logged on the website: > > Bug reference: 14322 > Logged by: Keith Fiske > Email address: keith@keithf4.com > PostgreSQL version: 9.5.4 > Operating system: Ubuntu 16.04 > Description: > > It seems when I call timestamp_to_str() on a non-null value then call it on > a null value in the same statement, it returns the previous non-null value. > I've included the code and debug lines from where I encountered this when > testing my app. Uh. You can't just call timestamptz_to_str() on a NULL value. The datum doesn't have to have any meaningful value if it's null. > I know I should always check for a null return from SPI before operating on > a value, and I do before I actually use those values. But I had them in my > debug lines where checking for whether they're null before outputting to > debug didn't seem to matter and it was really confusing me why the values > were returning recent timestamp values when I was pretty sure they were > null. Not sure if this can just be chalked up to undefined behavior when > dealing with nulls or it's an actual problem, so figured I'd report it. I don't think there's an issue here. The datum value isn't guaranteed to be initialized if the value is null, and I think that's what you're seeing here. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: