Re: BUG #18392: Can't restore database (using pg_restore) after latest Feb 8 update
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18392: Can't restore database (using pg_restore) after latest Feb 8 update |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2383726.1710452970@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #18392: Can't restore database (using pg_restore) after latest Feb 8 update (Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #18392: Can't restore database (using pg_restore) after latest Feb 8 update
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes: > That's not a PostgreSQL bug, that's a bug in your code. > You must have declared the function public.get_template_code(integer) as IMMUTABLE, but > it SELECTs from public.template, so it clearly is *not* immutable. It depends on the state > of the database, in your case on the existence of a certain table (and on its contents). Yeah. The concrete problem so far as pg_dump is concerned is that it can't see the dependencies that the body of get_template_code has, so it doesn't realize that it would have to postpone creation of this table till after public.template is created. There are various ways that you could hack around that by preventing the function from being considered for inlining, but as Laurenz suggests, that's just band-aiding over a fundamentally unsafe design. Pretending that this function is immutable will bite you eventually. BTW, I believe that what broke it for you as of the current releases is commits 743ddafc7 et al, which caused GENERATED expressions to be run through expression preprocessing at CREATE TABLE time: Two actual bugs of this ilk are fixed here. We failed to preprocess column GENERATED expressions before checking mutability, so that the code could fail to detect the use of a volatile function default-argument expression, or it could reject a polymorphic function that is actually immutable on the datatype of interest. Likewise, column DEFAULT expressions weren't preprocessed before determining if it's safe to apply the attmissingval mechanism. A false negative would just result in an unnecessary table rewrite, but a false positive could allow the attmissingval mechanism to be used in a case where it should not be, resulting in unexpected initial values in a new column. One of the things that happens in that preprocessing is inlining of inline-able SQL functions. This particular function is not inline-able I think, but we'd hit the parser error on the way to discovering that. (Hmm, I wonder if we could make inline_function do some tests on the raw parse tree so it could bail out earlier; I think we could verify that it's a SELECT with no FROM before invoking parse analysis. The extra complication could be justified as saving cycles for obviously non-inlinable SQL functions.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: