On 02/07/2012 12:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan<and...@dunslane.net> writes:
On 11/16/2011 10:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Upon further review, this patch would need some more work even for the
RowExpr case, because there are several places that build RowExprs
without bothering to build a valid colnames list. It's clearly soluble
if anyone cares to put in the work, but I'm not personally excited
enough to pursue it ...
The patch itself causes a core dump with the current regression tests.
Yeah, observing that was what made me write the above.
I've been looking at the other places that build RowExprs. Most of them
look OK and none seem clearly in need of fixing at first glance. Which
do you think need attention?
In general I think we'd have to require that colnames be supplied in all
RowExprs if we go this way. Anyplace that's trying to slide by without
will have to be fixed. I don't recall how many places that is.
I just had a thought that maybe we could make this simpler by dummying
up a list of colnames if we don't have one, instead of that assertion.
Or am I on the wrong track.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
