8bf66dedd8
Preprocessing of the HAVING clause will reduce havingQual to NIL if the clause is constant-TRUE. This is one case where that convention is rather unfortunate, because "HAVING TRUE" is not at all the same as not having any HAVING clause at all. (Per the SQL spec, it still forces the query to be grouped.) The planner deals with this by having a boolean hasHavingQual that records whether havingQual was originally nonempty; places that just want to check whether HAVING was specified are supposed to consult that. I found three places that got that wrong. Fortunately, these could only affect cost estimates not correctness. It'd be hard even to demonstrate the errors; for example, the one in allpaths.c would only matter in a query that has HAVING TRUE but no GROUP BY and no aggregates, which would require a completely variable-free SELECT list, making the case probably of only academic interest. Hence, while these are worth fixing before someone copies the incorrect coding somewhere more critical, they don't seem worth back-patching. I didn't bother trying to devise regression tests, either. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2503888.1666042643@sss.pgh.pa.us |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| expected | ||
| sql | ||
| .gitignore | ||
| Makefile | ||
| connection.c | ||
| deparse.c | ||
| meson.build | ||
| option.c | ||
| postgres_fdw--1.0--1.1.sql | ||
| postgres_fdw--1.0.sql | ||
| postgres_fdw.c | ||
| postgres_fdw.control | ||
| postgres_fdw.h | ||
| shippable.c | ||