Re: [BUGS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90 - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: [BUGS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1KeQWZOoDmDmGMwuqzPW9JhRS+ditQVFdAfGjNmMZzqMQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90
List pgsql-bugs
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:59:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Adam, Etienne (Nokia-TECH/Issy Les Moulineaux)" <etienne.adam@nokia.com> writes:
>> > ERROR:  XX000: unrecognized node type: 90
>> > LOCATION:  ExecReScan, execAmi.c:284
>>
>> (gdb) p (NodeTag) 90
>> $1 = T_GatherMergeState
>>
>> So, apparently somebody wrote ExecReScanGatherMerge, but never bothered
>> to plug it into ExecReScan.

Attached patch fixes the issue for me.  I have locally verified that
the gather merge gets executed in rescan path.  I haven't added a test
case for the same as having gather or gather merge on the inner side
of join can be time-consuming.  However, if you or others feel that it
is important to have a test to cover this code path, then I can try to
produce one.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] Crash report for some ICU-52 (debian8) COLLATE andwork_mem values
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90