On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 6:45 AM, Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Thomas Munro
> <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> In v10 we might need to go with a solution like what you've sketched
>>> here, because Tom will complain about breaking binary compatibility
>>> with EState (and maybe other PlanState nodes) in a released branch.
>
> Here's a pair of versions of that patch tidied up a bit, for
> REL_10_STABLE and master. Unfortunately I've been unable to come up
> with a reproducer that shows misbehaviour (something like what was
> reported on -bugs[1] which appears to be a case of calling
> dsa_get_address(wrong_area, some_dsa_pointer)).
>
+ EState *estate = gatherstate->ps.state;
+
+ /* Install our DSA area while executing the plan. */
+ estate->es_query_dsa = gatherstate->pei->area;
outerTupleSlot = ExecProcNode(outerPlan);
+ estate->es_query_dsa = NULL;
Won't the above coding pattern create a problem, if ExecProcNode
throws an error and outer block catches it and continues execution
(consider the case of execution inside PL blocks)?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com