Andrew Dunstan <andrew@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.
regards, tom lane