Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i8XZx-0005D9-K7 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:28:41 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i8XZu-0006m9-Vd for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:28:38 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i8XZu-0006lz-Nl for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:28:38 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i8XZn-00028d-Rx for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:28:38 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x8CMSPT4001142; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 18:28:25 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andres Freund cc: vinay.s.banakar@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: BUG #16006: Update queries fail on a table having any policy with a function that takes a whole-row var as arg In-reply-to: <20190912211047.kr7e4pn7iof76jfx@alap3.anarazel.de> References: <16006-99290d2e4642cbd5@postgresql.org> <28076.1568320435@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20190912211047.kr7e4pn7iof76jfx@alap3.anarazel.de> Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund message dated "Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:10:47 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1140.1568327305.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 18:28:25 -0400 Message-ID: <1141.1568327305@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Andres Freund writes: > I don't quite understand how this "visibly" broke between 9.5.15 and > 9.5.19 as the op reports? Haven't dug into it yet though. I'm confused about that too, since in my hands the submitted test case fails in both of those branches. I've also been able to adapt it to fail in v10/v11. Will commit in a moment. regards, tom lane