"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, I guess my only other question is to do with recursive/hierarchical
> queries: How will we handle those? All in same context?
Offhand I don't think it matters. Recursive queries are recursive in
the data, not in the plan tree.
On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 18:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is it possible to allocate the subquery in a child context of the main
> > query, so that it is technically a different context, yet can be freed
> > simultaneously?
>
> That's exactly what the code
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it possible to allocate the subquery in a child context of the main
> query, so that it is technically a different context, yet can be freed
> simultaneously?
That's exactly what the code *was* doing, but the problem is that we'd
free the child contex
On Tue, 2006-12-26 at 10:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> As you can probably guess, I'm leaning to #3, but wanted to see if
> anyone had an objection or a better idea.
Is it possible to allocate the subquery in a child context of the main
query, so that it is technically a different context, yet can b
I looked into the bug reported by Jean-Pierre Pelletier here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-12/msg00163.php
The cause of the crash is a reference to an already-deallocated
TupleDesc. The problem query has the structure of
SELECT sum(x) FROM (complicated-subselect) GROUP B
