Re: BUG #17646: create rule named "_RETURN" will cause pg core
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #17646: create rule named "_RETURN" will cause pg core |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2173460.1666017695@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #17646: create rule named "_RETURN" will cause pg core (Ilya Anfimov <ilan@tzirechnoy.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #17646: create rule named "_RETURN" will cause pg core
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Ilya Anfimov <ilan@tzirechnoy.com> writes: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:17:55AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> (Although the core dump is also not great --- something should've noticed >> the bogosity of the plan earlier than this.) > Id doesn't look much of a plan bogosity, > but rather implicit deletion of the "_RETURN" on select rule. Right, but then since there's no applicable rule, we end up generating a plan that tries to do a seqscan directly on the view relation, which of course lacks storage. Something should notice that a little sooner than segfaulting because of rel->rd_tableam being NULL --- it's not like we don't have hundreds of other sanity checks for not-really- supposed-to-happen catalog corruption. In versions before v12, I get something like regression=# select * from v1; ERROR: could not open file "base/16384/49209": No such file or directory which is a shade less bad, but still not great. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: