> "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> > AFAIC the relation between objects is not copied correctly
> > by copyObject() (i.e the same pointers to an object are copied
> > to different pointers by copyObject()).
>
> True, but it seems irrelevant to me --- as Jan Wieck was just pointing
> out, no code should ever depend on pointer-equality in parse trees or
> plan trees anyway.
>
> > There is a way to maintain the list of (old,new) pairs during
> > copyObject() operations.
>
> I think we'd be better off fixing any places that mistakenly assume
> pointer compare is sufficient. You didn't say which version you were
> testing, but we know there are a few bugs like that in the current
> CVS sources because of collateral damage from the EXCEPT/INTERSECT
> patch. I believe the plan is to either fix them or back out the patch
> before 6.5.
Yes, I removed a pointer comparison in the optimizer. It now uses
equal(). Someone needs to go over EXCEPT/INTERSECT code and identify
introduced problems or we are going to be chasing these introduced bugs
for months. Anyone volunteering?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026