Re: Getting error 42P02, despite query parameter being sent

Greetings, group!

I'm trying to understand a low-level issue. Am evaluating a new client library for Postgres; it's not particularly popular / mainstream, and as I've understood so far, sports an independent implementation of PG binary protocol.

The issue I'm hitting with it is exemplified by server logs like this:

2024-11-16 10:28:19.927 UTC [46] LOG: statement: SET client_encoding = 'UTF8';SET client_min_messages TO WARNING;

2024-11-16 10:28:19.928 UTC [46] LOG: execute <unnamed>: CREATE VIEW public.foobar (alg, hash) AS VALUES ('md5', $1);

At least for SQL level prepared statements the statement has to be one of :

SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, MERGE, or VALUES

so CREATE is not valid, and I guess the extended protocol prepared statements aint no different in this regard.


2024-11-16 10:28:19.928 UTC [46] DETAIL: parameters: $1 = 'test-param-value'

2024-11-16 10:28:19.928 UTC [46] ERROR: there is no parameter $1 at character 57

Of course, I am passing a value for parameter $1; and I can trace that the client lib sends it out on the wire as expected. (Attaching packet captures.)

Heck, even the PG server itself says, DETAIL: parameters: $1 = 'test-param-value' — so it sees the parameter! But then, immediately unsees it.

Am I being hit by a PG bug? Is this a known issue?

I'd retested with master version of that client library, and against 6 latest major versions of PostgreSQL server (12 throughout to 17). No difference across versions spotted; the result is consistently error 42P02.

Is the client library doing something wrong? How can the server claim there's no parameter $1 immediately after logging its value it has received?

I did minify a 100-line SSCCE that reproduces the issue and can be shared.

Any advice, or pointers on what to check next besides delving into PG source, I'd greatly appreciate. Thanks in advance.

Max