Re: [HACKERS] Re: Apparent bug in _make_subplan - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: Apparent bug in _make_subplan
Date
Msg-id 199906171456.KAA24014@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: Apparent bug in _make_subplan  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> After looking through all the references to varlevelsup, it's clear
> that all pieces of the system *except* subselect.c treat varlevelsup
> as a relative level number, so-many-levels-out-from-current-subplan.
> subselect.c has a couple of places that think nonzero varlevelsup
> is an absolute level number, with 1 as the top plan.  This is certainly
> a source of bugs --- it happens to work for two-level plans, but will
> fail for anything more deeply nested.  I will work on fixing subselect.c
> to bring it in line with the rest of the world...

varlevelsup was always intended to be relative.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig
Next
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] (don't know who else to tell) 6.5 gets build on LinuxPPCR5 but fails a lot of regr. tests