9b35ddce93
When a view has a function-returning-composite in FROM, and there are some dropped columns in the underlying composite type, ruleutils.c printed junk in the column alias list for the reconstructed FROM entry. Before 9.3, this was prevented by doing get_rte_attribute_is_dropped tests while printing the column alias list; but that solution is not currently available to us for reasons I'll explain below. Instead, check for empty-string entries in the alias list, which can only exist if that column position had been dropped at the time the view was made. (The parser fills in empty strings to preserve the invariant that the aliases correspond to physical column positions.) While this is sufficient to handle the case of columns dropped before the view was made, we have still got issues with columns dropped after the view was made. In particular, the view could contain Vars that explicitly reference such columns! The dependency machinery really ought to refuse the column drop attempt in such cases, as it would do when trying to drop a table column that's explicitly referenced in views. However, we currently neglect to store dependencies on columns of composite types, and fixing that is likely to be too big to be back-patchable (not to mention that existing views in existing databases would not have the needed pg_depend entries anyway). So I'll leave that for a separate patch. Pre-9.3, ruleutils would print such Vars normally (with their original column names) even though it suppressed their entries in the RTE's column alias list. This is certainly bogus, since the printed view definition would fail to reload, but at least it didn't crash. However, as of 9.3 the printed column alias list is tightly tied to the names printed for Vars; so we can't treat columns as dropped for one purpose and not dropped for the other. This is why we can't just put back the get_rte_attribute_is_dropped test: it results in an assertion failure if the view in fact contains any Vars referencing the dropped column. Once we've got dependencies preventing such cases, we'll probably want to do it that way instead of relying on the empty-string test used here. This fix turned up a very ancient bug in outfuncs/readfuncs, namely that T_String nodes containing empty strings were not dumped/reloaded correctly: the node was printed as "<>" which is read as a string value of <>. Since (per SQL) we disallow empty-string identifiers, such nodes don't occur normally, which is why we'd not noticed. (Such nodes aren't used for literal constants, just identifiers.) Per report from Marc Schablewski. Back-patch to 9.3 which is where the rule printing behavior changed. The dangling-variable case is broken all the way back, but that's not what his complaint is about. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| Makefile | ||
| README | ||
| bitmapset.c | ||
| copyfuncs.c | ||
| equalfuncs.c | ||
| list.c | ||
| makefuncs.c | ||
| nodeFuncs.c | ||
| nodes.c | ||
| outfuncs.c | ||
| params.c | ||
| print.c | ||
| read.c | ||
| readfuncs.c | ||
| tidbitmap.c | ||
| value.c | ||
README
src/backend/nodes/README
Node Structures
===============
Andrew Yu (11/94)
Introduction
------------
The current node structures are plain old C structures. "Inheritance" is
achieved by convention. No additional functions will be generated. Functions
that manipulate node structures reside in this directory.
FILES IN THIS DIRECTORY (src/backend/nodes/)
General-purpose node manipulation functions:
copyfuncs.c - copy a node tree
equalfuncs.c - compare two node trees
outfuncs.c - convert a node tree to text representation
readfuncs.c - convert text representation back to a node tree
makefuncs.c - creator functions for some common node types
nodeFuncs.c - some other general-purpose manipulation functions
Specialized manipulation functions:
bitmapset.c - Bitmapset support
list.c - generic list support
params.c - Param support
tidbitmap.c - TIDBitmap support
value.c - support for Value nodes
FILES IN src/include/nodes/
Node definitions:
nodes.h - define node tags (NodeTag)
primnodes.h - primitive nodes
parsenodes.h - parse tree nodes
plannodes.h - plan tree nodes
relation.h - planner internal nodes
execnodes.h - executor nodes
memnodes.h - memory nodes
pg_list.h - generic list
Steps to Add a Node
-------------------
Suppose you wanna define a node Foo:
1. Add a tag (T_Foo) to the enum NodeTag in nodes.h. (If you insert the
tag in a way that moves the numbers associated with existing tags,
you'll need to recompile the whole tree after doing this. It doesn't
force initdb though, because the numbers never go to disk.)
2. Add the structure definition to the appropriate include/nodes/???.h file.
If you intend to inherit from, say a Plan node, put Plan as the first field
of your struct definition.
3. If you intend to use copyObject, equal, nodeToString or stringToNode,
add an appropriate function to copyfuncs.c, equalfuncs.c, outfuncs.c
and readfuncs.c accordingly. (Except for frequently used nodes, don't
bother writing a creator function in makefuncs.c) The header comments
in those files give general rules for whether you need to add support.
4. Add cases to the functions in nodeFuncs.c as needed. There are many
other places you'll probably also need to teach about your new node
type. Best bet is to grep for references to one or two similar existing
node types to find all the places to touch.
Historical Note
---------------
Prior to the current simple C structure definitions, the Node structures
used a pseudo-inheritance system which automatically generated creator and
accessor functions. Since every node inherited from LispValue, the whole thing
was a mess. Here's a little anecdote:
LispValue definition -- class used to support lisp structures
in C. This is here because we did not want to totally rewrite
planner and executor code which depended on lisp structures when
we ported postgres V1 from lisp to C. -cim 4/23/90