diff options
author | Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> | 2024-09-11 11:41:47 -0400 |
---|---|---|
committer | Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> | 2024-09-11 11:41:47 -0400 |
commit | 77761ee5dddc0518235a51c533893e81e5f375b9 (patch) | |
tree | 8c8293ac4640cd9b5ecdaf02d17441083b60a7b7 /src/backend/utils/adt/jsonpath_exec.c | |
parent | 280423300b361eb9deff5ea40d4b0e6fab00211b (diff) | |
download | postgresql-77761ee5dddc0518235a51c533893e81e5f375b9.tar.gz postgresql-77761ee5dddc0518235a51c533893e81e5f375b9.zip |
Remove incorrect Assert.
check_agglevels_and_constraints() asserted that if we find an
aggregate function in an EXPR_KIND_FROM_SUBSELECT expression, the
expression must be in a LATERAL subquery. Alexander Lakhin found a
case where that's not so: because of the odd scoping rules for NEW/OLD
within a rule, a reference to NEW/OLD could cause an aggregate to be
considered top-level even though it's in an unmarked sub-select.
The error message that would be thrown seems sufficiently on-point,
so just remove the Assert. (Hence, this is not a bug for production
builds.)
This Assert was added by me in commit eaccfded9 (9.3 era). It looks
like I put it in to cross-check that the new logic for detecting
misplaced aggregates (using agglevelsup) caught the same cases that a
previous check on p_lateral_active did. So there might have been some
related misbehavior before eaccfded9 ... but that's very ancient
history by now, so I didn't dig any deeper.
Per bug #18608 from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18608-48de0717508ee429@postgresql.org
Diffstat (limited to 'src/backend/utils/adt/jsonpath_exec.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions