aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/access/gist/gistutil.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorTom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>2020-01-26 14:31:08 -0500
committerTom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>2020-01-26 14:31:08 -0500
commit5220ced0de5de1b88437c00fffabfac223ee9866 (patch)
tree40d2321dbc000951ec838819b3552fa101be39e7 /src/backend/access/gist/gistutil.c
parentb9988facaec81733ab8a67c2bd75b5d3e72c1e16 (diff)
downloadpostgresql-5220ced0de5de1b88437c00fffabfac223ee9866.tar.gz
postgresql-5220ced0de5de1b88437c00fffabfac223ee9866.zip
In postgres_fdw, don't try to ship MULTIEXPR updates to remote server.
In a statement like "UPDATE remote_tab SET (x,y) = (SELECT ...)", we'd conclude that the statement could be directly executed remotely, because the sub-SELECT is in a resjunk tlist item that's not examined for shippability. Currently that ends up crashing if the sub-SELECT contains any remote Vars. Prevent the crash by deeming MULTIEXEC Params to be unshippable. This is a bit of a brute-force solution, since if the sub-SELECT *doesn't* contain any remote Vars, the current execution technology would work; but that's not a terribly common use-case for this syntax, I think. In any case, we generally don't try to ship sub-SELECTs, so it won't surprise anybody that this doesn't end up as a remote direct update. I'd be inclined to see if that general limitation can be fixed before worrying about this case further. Per report from Lukáš Sobotka. Back-patch to 9.6. 9.5 had MULTIEXPR, but we didn't try to perform remote direct updates then, so the case didn't arise anyway. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJif3k+iA_ekBB5Zw2hDBaE1wtiQa4LH4_JUXrrMGwTrH0J01Q@mail.gmail.com
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/access/gist/gistutil.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions