On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:28:55PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 8:49 AM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> >
> > Right. Here is a new patch with that fix added and a small conflict
> > resolved.
>
> Great.
>
> It seems print_function_sqlbody() is not protected to avoid receiving
> a function that hasn't a standard sql body in
> src/backend/utils/adt/ruleutils.c:3292, but instead it has an assert
> that gets hit with something like this:
>
> CREATE FUNCTION foo() RETURNS int LANGUAGE SQL AS $$ SELECT 1 $$;
> SELECT pg_get_function_sqlbody('foo'::regproc);
It would also be good to add a regression test checking that we can't define a
function with both a prosrc and a prosqlbody.
@@ -76,6 +77,7 @@ ProcedureCreate(const char *procedureName,
Oid languageValidator,
const char *prosrc,
const char *probin,
+ Node *prosqlbody,
char prokind,
bool security_definer,
bool isLeakProof,
@@ -119,8 +121,6 @@ ProcedureCreate(const char *procedureName,
/*
* sanity checks
*/
- Assert(PointerIsValid(prosrc));
-
parameterCount = parameterTypes->dim1;
Shouldn't we still assert that we either have a valid procsrc or valid
prosqlbody?
No other comments apart from that!
