Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vdBty-00F7Dv-13 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2026 18:35:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vdBtx-009wHA-0x for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2026 18:35:30 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vdBtx-009wGs-07 for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2026 18:35:29 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vdBtw-004Znr-1L for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2026 18:35:28 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 606IZNR11606058; Tue, 6 Jan 2026 13:35:23 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Andres Freund cc: David Rowley , redraiment@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: BUG #19370: PG18 returns incorrect array slice results when slice bounds depend on another array expression In-reply-to: References: <19370-7fb7a5854b7618f1@postgresql.org> <1588384.1767715181@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1593905.1767717601@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund message dated "Tue, 06 Jan 2026 12:42:56 -0500" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1606056.1767724523.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2026 13:35:23 -0500 Message-ID: <1606057.1767724523@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Andres Freund writes: > On 2026-01-06 11:40:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> We could either generalize EEOP_PARAM_SET to include an explicit >> specification of the source value's address > That's pretty trivial, see attached. I don't quite understand why I did= n't go > that way immediately... Yeah, that looks about right. > At the very least we need to create a simplified testcase for the bug at= hand. Yup, the sudoku example is fun but it seems inappropriate as a test case. >> or insert some kind of LOAD operation to copy the computed value into >> state->resvalue/resnull. I don't see anything that looks like that toda= y, >> though. > Hm, wouldn't that have exactly the same issues as we have today anyway? Indeed ... -ENOCAFFEINE regards, tom lane