Re: search_plan_tree(): handling of non-leaf CustomScanState nodes causes segfault
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: search_plan_tree(): handling of non-leaf CustomScanState nodes causes segfault |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 347100.1610995608@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | search_plan_tree(): handling of non-leaf CustomScanState nodes causes segfault (David Geier <david@swarm64.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: search_plan_tree(): handling of non-leaf CustomScanState nodes causes segfault
Re: search_plan_tree(): handling of non-leaf CustomScanState nodes causes segfault |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
David Geier <david@swarm64.com> writes:
> search_plan_tree() assumes that
> CustomScanState::ScanState::ss_currentRelation is never NULL. In my
> understanding that only holds for CustomScanState nodes which are at the
> bottom of the plan and actually read from a relation. CustomScanState
> nodes which are not at the bottom don't have ss_currentRelation set. I
> believe for such nodes, instead search_plan_tree() should recurse into
> CustomScanState::custom_ps.
Hm. I agree that we shouldn't simply assume that ss_currentRelation
isn't null. However, we cannot make search_plan_tree() descend
through non-leaf CustomScan nodes, because we don't know what processing
is involved there. We need to find a scan that is guaranteed to return
rows that are one-to-one with the cursor output. This is why the function
doesn't descend through join or aggregation nodes, and I see no argument
by which we should assume we know more about what a customscan node will
do than we know about those.
So I'm inclined to think a suitable fix is just
- if (RelationGetRelid(sstate->ss_currentRelation) == table_oid)
+ if (sstate->ss_currentRelation &&
+ RelationGetRelid(sstate->ss_currentRelation) == table_oid)
result = sstate;
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: