Re: (Comment)Bug in CteScanNext - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: (Comment)Bug in CteScanNext
Date
Msg-id 88b70b80-be5a-064c-155a-0a32a7395890@BlueTreble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: (Comment)Bug in CteScanNext  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: (Comment)Bug in CteScanNext
List pgsql-hackers
On 9/3/16 1:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Or we could add something like "But first, we must deal with the special
> case of reversing direction after reaching EOF."

I'm working on that, but one thing isn't clear to me... why do we only 
skip past the last tuple if (!node->leader->eof_cte)? Even if we've hit 
the end of the underlying node, the tuplestore could still return data, 
and AFAICT we would still need to move past the last item in the 
tuplestore, no?
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)   mobile: 512-569-9461



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Forbid use of LF and CR characters in database and role names
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem