pgsql-server/src/backend/executor execScan.c
CVSROOT: /cvsroot
Module name: pgsql-server
Changes by: tgl@svr1.postgresql.org 03/09/25 16:41:49
Modified files:
src/backend/executor: execScan.c
Log message:
tlist_matches_tupdesc() needs to defend itself against dropped columns.
Tom Lane wrote:
CVSROOT: /cvsroot
Module name: pgsql-server
Changes by: tgl@svr1.postgresql.org 03/09/25 16:41:49Modified files:
src/backend/executor: execScan.cLog message:
tlist_matches_tupdesc() needs to defend itself against dropped columns.
Tom, does this duplicate a patch in the patch queue, or is it separate?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I discovered that TupleDescGetAttInMetadata and BuildTupleFromCStrings
don't deal well with tuples having dropped columns. The attached fixes
the issue. Please apply.
Thanks,
Joe
--------------080304060303070809090706
Content-Type: text/plain;
name="attinmeta-drop-col-fix.1.patch"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="attinmeta-drop-col-fix.1.patch"
Index: src/backend/executor/execTuples.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /opt/src/cvs/pgsql-server/src/backend/executor/execTuples.c,v
retrieving revision 1.71
diff -c -r1.71 execTuples.c
*** src/backend/executor/execTuples.c 8 Aug 2003 21:41:40 -0000 1.71
--- src/backend/executor/execTuples.c 21 Sep 2003 23:23:02 -0000
***************
*** 674,689 ****
* Gather info needed later to call the "in" function for each
* attribute
*/
! attinfuncinfo = (FmgrInfo *) palloc(natts * sizeof(FmgrInfo));
! attelems = (Oid *) palloc(natts * sizeof(Oid));
! atttypmods = (int32 *) palloc(natts * sizeof(int32));
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
tlist_matches_tupdesc() needs to defend itself against dropped columns.
Tom, does this duplicate a patch in the patch queue, or is it separate?
No, it was not from the patch queue. Joe's patch addresses some other
issues.
regards, tom lane