Re: Bug in query rewriter - hasModifyingCTE not getting set - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Bug in query rewriter - hasModifyingCTE not getting set
Date
Msg-id 3688544.1621523863@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Bug in query rewriter - hasModifyingCTE not getting set  ("tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com>)
Responses RE: Bug in query rewriter - hasModifyingCTE not getting set
List pgsql-hackers
"tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com> writes:
> From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>> I think either the bit about rule_action is unnecessary, or most of
>> the code immediately above this is wrong, because it's only updating
>> flags in sub_action.  Why do you think it's necessary to change
>> rule_action in addition to sub_action?

> Finally, I think I've understood what you meant.  Yes, the current code seems to be wrong.

I'm fairly skeptical of this claim, because that code has stood for a
long time.  Can you provide an example (not involving hasModifyingCTE)
in which it's wrong?

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: multi-install PostgresNode fails with older postgres versions
Next
From: Ondřej Žižka
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronous commit behavior during network outage