pg.ddx.io  pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where"
6+ messages / 5 participants
[nested] [flat]

Commits from this thread:
  2021-04-13 6c0373ab77  Allow table-qualified variable names in ON CONFLICT ... WHERE.
* BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where"
@ 2021-04-09 21:31 PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
  2021-04-10 07:57 ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread

From: PG Bug reporting form @ 2021-04-09 21:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; +Cc: lukas.eder@gmail.com

The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference:      16958
Logged by:          Lukas Eder
Email address:      lukas.eder@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 13.2
Operating system:   Docker on Windows
Description:        

I'm using Docker on Windows:

-------------------------------------------------------------------
select version();
-------------------------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL 13.2 (Debian 13.2-1.pgdg100+1) on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled
by gcc (Debian 8.3.0-6) 8.3.0, 64-bit

Consider the following SQL script:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
create table t (
  a int,
  b int,
  c int
);

create unique index i on t(a)
where t.b is null;

insert into t (a, b)
values (
  1, 
  1
)
on conflict (a)
where t.b is null -- Error here
do update
set
  c = 1
returning t.a, t.b, t.c;

drop table t;
-------------------------------------------------------------------

There's an error reported:

SQL Error [42P01]: ERROR: invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table
"t"
  Hint: There is an entry for table "t", but it cannot be referenced from
this part of the query.
  Position: 71

Notice the qualification of the t.b column in the "on conflict .. where"
clause. I don't understand why b cannot be qualified at this location. It
can be qualified in the index definition, looks like a bug to me.



^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where"
  2021-04-09 21:31 BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
@ 2021-04-10 07:57 ` Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
  2021-04-10 10:28   ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread

From: Pantelis Theodosiou @ 2021-04-10 07:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Lukas Eder <lukas.eder@gmail.com>; pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org

On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 11:00 PM PG Bug reporting form <
noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:

> The following bug has been logged on the website:
>
> Bug reference:      16958
> Logged by:          Lukas Eder
> Email address:      lukas.eder@gmail.com
> PostgreSQL version: 13.2
> Operating system:   Docker on Windows
> Description:
>
> I'm using Docker on Windows:
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> select version();
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> PostgreSQL 13.2 (Debian 13.2-1.pgdg100+1) on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled
> by gcc (Debian 8.3.0-6) 8.3.0, 64-bit
>
> Consider the following SQL script:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> create table t (
>   a int,
>   b int,
>   c int
> );
>
> create unique index i on t(a)
> where t.b is null;
>
> insert into t (a, b)
> values (
>   1,
>   1
> )
> on conflict (a)
> where t.b is null -- Error here
> do update
> set
>   c = 1
> returning t.a, t.b, t.c;
>
> drop table t;
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> There's an error reported:
>
> SQL Error [42P01]: ERROR: invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table
> "t"
>   Hint: There is an entry for table "t", but it cannot be referenced from
> this part of the query.
>   Position: 71
>
> Notice the qualification of the t.b column in the "on conflict .. where"
> clause. I don't understand why b cannot be qualified at this location. It
> can be qualified in the index definition, looks like a bug to me.
>

 You don't need and shouldn't prefix the column with the table name in that
part. This should work:

...
on conflict (a)
where b is null
do update
...

^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where"
  2021-04-09 21:31 BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
  2021-04-10 07:57 ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
@ 2021-04-10 10:28   ` Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
  2021-04-10 16:28     ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread

From: Vik Fearing @ 2021-04-10 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>; Lukas Eder <lukas.eder@gmail.com>; pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org

On 4/10/21 9:57 AM, Pantelis Theodosiou wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 11:00 PM PG Bug reporting form <
> noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
> 
>> insert into t (a, b)
>> values (
>>   1,
>>   1
>> )
>> on conflict (a)
>> where t.b is null -- Error here
>> do update
>> set
>>   c = 1
>> returning t.a, t.b, t.c;

>> There's an error reported:
>>
>> SQL Error [42P01]: ERROR: invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table
>> "t"
>>   Hint: There is an entry for table "t", but it cannot be referenced from
>> this part of the query.
>>   Position: 71
>>
>> Notice the qualification of the t.b column in the "on conflict .. where"
>> clause. I don't understand why b cannot be qualified at this location. It
>> can be qualified in the index definition, looks like a bug to me.
>>
> 
>  You don't need and shouldn't prefix the column with the table name in that
> part. This should work:
> 
> ...
> on conflict (a)
> where b is null
> do update
> ...

Not needing to and not being able to are two completely different
things.  I believe tablename qualification should be allowed here even
if it isn't necessary.
-- 
Vik Fearing





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where"
  2021-04-09 21:31 BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
  2021-04-10 07:57 ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
  2021-04-10 10:28   ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
@ 2021-04-10 16:28     ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
  2021-04-10 16:54       ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread

From: Tom Lane @ 2021-04-10 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>; +Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>; Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>; Lukas Eder <lukas.eder@gmail.com>; pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org

Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org> writes:
> On 4/10/21 9:57 AM, Pantelis Theodosiou wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 11:00 PM PG Bug reporting form <
>> noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
>>> SQL Error [42P01]: ERROR: invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table "t"
>>> Hint: There is an entry for table "t", but it cannot be referenced from
>>> this part of the query.
>>> 
>>> Notice the qualification of the t.b column in the "on conflict .. where"
>>> clause. I don't understand why b cannot be qualified at this location. It
>>> can be qualified in the index definition, looks like a bug to me.

>> You don't need and shouldn't prefix the column with the table name in that
>> part. This should work:

> Not needing to and not being able to are two completely different
> things.  I believe tablename qualification should be allowed here even
> if it isn't necessary.

It does seem like a pointless prohibition, but the comment about it in
the source code implies it was intentional.  Peter, do you remember
why?

Anyway, if the prohibition isn't necessary, the attached one-liner
gets most of the way to removing it.  I'm not quite satisfied with
this though:

regression=# create table t(a int primary key, b int, c int);
CREATE TABLE
regression=# insert into t (a,b) values(1,1) on conflict(a)
where excluded.b is null do update set c=excluded.c+1;
ERROR:  missing FROM-clause entry for table "excluded"
LINE 2: where excluded.b is null do update set c=excluded.c+1;
              ^

Seems like we want the same cannot-be-referenced HINT here as in
the complaint, so just nuking the whole namespace as the code
currently does ought to be revisited.

			regards, tom lane

Attachments:

allow-table-qual-in-ON-CONFLICT-wip.patch (text/x-diff, 843B) download diff --git a/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c b/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c index af80aa4593..4402be6845 100644 --- a/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c +++ b/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c @@ -3225,13 +3225,13 @@ transformOnConflictArbiter(ParseState *pstate, List *save_namespace; /* - * While we process the arbiter expressions, accept only non-qualified - * references to the target table. Hide any other relations. + * While we process the arbiter expressions, accept only references to + * the target table. Hide any other relations. */ save_namespace = pstate->p_namespace; pstate->p_namespace = NIL; addNSItemToQuery(pstate, pstate->p_target_nsitem, - false, false, true); + false, true, true); if (infer->indexElems) *arbiterExpr = resolve_unique_index_expr(pstate, infer,
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where"
  2021-04-09 21:31 BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
  2021-04-10 07:57 ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
  2021-04-10 10:28   ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
  2021-04-10 16:28     ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
@ 2021-04-10 16:54       ` Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
  2021-04-11 00:20         ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread

From: Peter Geoghegan @ 2021-04-10 16:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>; Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>; Lukas Eder <lukas.eder@gmail.com>; PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>

On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:28 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> It does seem like a pointless prohibition, but the comment about it in
> the source code implies it was intentional.  Peter, do you remember
> why?

No. The intention was to make it like CREATE INDEX. Apparently CREATE
INDEX allows the columns to be qualified, though, so that explanation
doesn't justify it.

There might have been a concern about users being confused about the
difference between what the INSERT docs call 'index_predicate' and
what they call 'condition' in the synopsis.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan





^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where"
  2021-04-09 21:31 BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
  2021-04-10 07:57 ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
  2021-04-10 10:28   ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
  2021-04-10 16:28     ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
  2021-04-10 16:54       ` Re: BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
@ 2021-04-11 00:20         ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread

From: Tom Lane @ 2021-04-11 00:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>; +Cc: Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>; Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>; Lukas Eder <lukas.eder@gmail.com>; PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:28 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> It does seem like a pointless prohibition, but the comment about it in
>> the source code implies it was intentional.  Peter, do you remember
>> why?

> No. The intention was to make it like CREATE INDEX. Apparently CREATE
> INDEX allows the columns to be qualified, though, so that explanation
> doesn't justify it.

OK.  Here's a more fleshed-out patch that makes an effort to get rid of
duplicate namespace-munging.

I found that creating the EXCLUDED RTE soon enough to draw the complaint
I wanted about bogus references also caused this interesting change in
the regression test results:

 ERROR:  column "keyy" does not exist
 LINE 1: ...nsertconflicttest values (1, 'Apple') on conflict (keyy) do ...
                                                              ^
-HINT:  Perhaps you meant to reference the column "insertconflicttest.key".
+HINT:  Perhaps you meant to reference the column "insertconflicttest.key" or the column "excluded.key".
 -- Have useful HINT for EXCLUDED.* RTE within UPDATE:

This seems to me like an independent bug: why is the misspelled-column-
name hint machinery including inaccessible columns in its results?
That seems much more likely to be confusing than helpful.  But if there
is actually a defensible reason for doing that, then this seems like
an okay change.

			regards, tom lane

Attachments:

allow-table-qual-in-ON-CONFLICT-1.patch (text/x-diff, 9.0K) download diff --git a/src/backend/parser/analyze.c b/src/backend/parser/analyze.c index 9f13880d19..862f18a92f 100644 --- a/src/backend/parser/analyze.c +++ b/src/backend/parser/analyze.c @@ -869,25 +869,27 @@ transformInsertStmt(ParseState *pstate, InsertStmt *stmt) attr_num - FirstLowInvalidHeapAttributeNumber); } - /* Process ON CONFLICT, if any. */ - if (stmt->onConflictClause) - qry->onConflict = transformOnConflictClause(pstate, - stmt->onConflictClause); - /* - * If we have a RETURNING clause, we need to add the target relation to - * the query namespace before processing it, so that Var references in - * RETURNING will work. Also, remove any namespace entries added in a + * If we have any clauses yet to process, set the query namespace to + * contain only the target relation, removing any entries added in a * sub-SELECT or VALUES list. */ - if (stmt->returningList) + if (stmt->onConflictClause || stmt->returningList) { pstate->p_namespace = NIL; addNSItemToQuery(pstate, pstate->p_target_nsitem, false, true, true); + } + + /* Process ON CONFLICT, if any. */ + if (stmt->onConflictClause) + qry->onConflict = transformOnConflictClause(pstate, + stmt->onConflictClause); + + /* Process RETURNING, if any. */ + if (stmt->returningList) qry->returningList = transformReturningList(pstate, stmt->returningList); - } /* done building the range table and jointree */ qry->rtable = pstate->p_rtable; @@ -1014,6 +1016,7 @@ static OnConflictExpr * transformOnConflictClause(ParseState *pstate, OnConflictClause *onConflictClause) { + ParseNamespaceItem *exclNSItem = NULL; List *arbiterElems; Node *arbiterWhere; Oid arbiterConstraint; @@ -1023,29 +1026,17 @@ transformOnConflictClause(ParseState *pstate, List *exclRelTlist = NIL; OnConflictExpr *result; - /* Process the arbiter clause, ON CONFLICT ON (...) */ - transformOnConflictArbiter(pstate, onConflictClause, &arbiterElems, - &arbiterWhere, &arbiterConstraint); - - /* Process DO UPDATE */ + /* + * If this is ON CONFLICT ... UPDATE, first create the range table entry + * for the EXCLUDED pseudo relation, so that that will be present while + * processing arbiter expressions. (You can't actually reference it from + * there, but this provides a useful error message if you try.) + */ if (onConflictClause->action == ONCONFLICT_UPDATE) { Relation targetrel = pstate->p_target_relation; - ParseNamespaceItem *exclNSItem; RangeTblEntry *exclRte; - /* - * All INSERT expressions have been parsed, get ready for potentially - * existing SET statements that need to be processed like an UPDATE. - */ - pstate->p_is_insert = false; - - /* - * Add range table entry for the EXCLUDED pseudo relation. relkind is - * set to composite to signal that we're not dealing with an actual - * relation, and no permission checks are required on it. (We'll - * check the actual target relation, instead.) - */ exclNSItem = addRangeTableEntryForRelation(pstate, targetrel, RowExclusiveLock, @@ -1054,6 +1045,11 @@ transformOnConflictClause(ParseState *pstate, exclRte = exclNSItem->p_rte; exclRelIndex = exclNSItem->p_rtindex; + /* + * relkind is set to composite to signal that we're not dealing with + * an actual relation, and no permission checks are required on it. + * (We'll check the actual target relation, instead.) + */ exclRte->relkind = RELKIND_COMPOSITE_TYPE; exclRte->requiredPerms = 0; /* other permissions fields in exclRte are already empty */ @@ -1061,14 +1057,27 @@ transformOnConflictClause(ParseState *pstate, /* Create EXCLUDED rel's targetlist for use by EXPLAIN */ exclRelTlist = BuildOnConflictExcludedTargetlist(targetrel, exclRelIndex); + } + + /* Process the arbiter clause, ON CONFLICT ON (...) */ + transformOnConflictArbiter(pstate, onConflictClause, &arbiterElems, + &arbiterWhere, &arbiterConstraint); + + /* Process DO UPDATE */ + if (onConflictClause->action == ONCONFLICT_UPDATE) + { + /* + * Expressions in the UPDATE targetlist need to be handled like UPDATE + * not INSERT. We don't need to save/restore this because all INSERT + * expressions have been parsed already. + */ + pstate->p_is_insert = false; /* - * Add EXCLUDED and the target RTE to the namespace, so that they can - * be used in the UPDATE subexpressions. + * Add the EXCLUDED pseudo relation to the query namespace, making it + * available in the UPDATE subexpressions. */ addNSItemToQuery(pstate, exclNSItem, false, true, true); - addNSItemToQuery(pstate, pstate->p_target_nsitem, - false, true, true); /* * Now transform the UPDATE subexpressions. @@ -1079,6 +1088,14 @@ transformOnConflictClause(ParseState *pstate, onConflictWhere = transformWhereClause(pstate, onConflictClause->whereClause, EXPR_KIND_WHERE, "WHERE"); + + /* + * Remove the EXCLUDED pseudo relation from the query namespace, since + * it's not supposed to be available in RETURNING. (Maybe someday we + * could allow that, and drop this step.) + */ + Assert((ParseNamespaceItem *) llast(pstate->p_namespace) == exclNSItem); + pstate->p_namespace = list_delete_last(pstate->p_namespace); } /* Finally, build ON CONFLICT DO [NOTHING | UPDATE] expression */ diff --git a/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c b/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c index af80aa4593..89d95d3e94 100644 --- a/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c +++ b/src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c @@ -3222,17 +3222,6 @@ transformOnConflictArbiter(ParseState *pstate, /* ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING does not require an inference clause */ if (infer) { - List *save_namespace; - - /* - * While we process the arbiter expressions, accept only non-qualified - * references to the target table. Hide any other relations. - */ - save_namespace = pstate->p_namespace; - pstate->p_namespace = NIL; - addNSItemToQuery(pstate, pstate->p_target_nsitem, - false, false, true); - if (infer->indexElems) *arbiterExpr = resolve_unique_index_expr(pstate, infer, pstate->p_target_relation); @@ -3245,8 +3234,6 @@ transformOnConflictArbiter(ParseState *pstate, *arbiterWhere = transformExpr(pstate, infer->whereClause, EXPR_KIND_INDEX_PREDICATE); - pstate->p_namespace = save_namespace; - /* * If the arbiter is specified by constraint name, get the constraint * OID and mark the constrained columns as requiring SELECT privilege, diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/insert_conflict.out b/src/test/regress/expected/insert_conflict.out index a54a51e5c7..66d8633e3e 100644 --- a/src/test/regress/expected/insert_conflict.out +++ b/src/test/regress/expected/insert_conflict.out @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ insert into insertconflicttest values (1, 'Apple') on conflict (keyy) do update ERROR: column "keyy" does not exist LINE 1: ...nsertconflicttest values (1, 'Apple') on conflict (keyy) do ... ^ -HINT: Perhaps you meant to reference the column "insertconflicttest.key". +HINT: Perhaps you meant to reference the column "insertconflicttest.key" or the column "excluded.key". -- Have useful HINT for EXCLUDED.* RTE within UPDATE: insert into insertconflicttest values (1, 'Apple') on conflict (key) do update set fruit = excluded.fruitt; ERROR: column excluded.fruitt does not exist @@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ drop index fruit_index; create unique index partial_key_index on insertconflicttest(key) where fruit like '%berry'; -- Succeeds insert into insertconflicttest values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) where fruit like '%berry' do update set fruit = excluded.fruit; -insert into insertconflicttest values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) where fruit like '%berry' and fruit = 'inconsequential' do nothing; +insert into insertconflicttest as t values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) where fruit like '%berry' and t.fruit = 'inconsequential' do nothing; -- fails insert into insertconflicttest values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) do update set fruit = excluded.fruit; ERROR: there is no unique or exclusion constraint matching the ON CONFLICT specification diff --git a/src/test/regress/sql/insert_conflict.sql b/src/test/regress/sql/insert_conflict.sql index 43691cd335..23d5778b82 100644 --- a/src/test/regress/sql/insert_conflict.sql +++ b/src/test/regress/sql/insert_conflict.sql @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ create unique index partial_key_index on insertconflicttest(key) where fruit lik -- Succeeds insert into insertconflicttest values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) where fruit like '%berry' do update set fruit = excluded.fruit; -insert into insertconflicttest values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) where fruit like '%berry' and fruit = 'inconsequential' do nothing; +insert into insertconflicttest as t values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) where fruit like '%berry' and t.fruit = 'inconsequential' do nothing; -- fails insert into insertconflicttest values (23, 'Blackberry') on conflict (key) do update set fruit = excluded.fruit;
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread


end of thread, other threads:[~2021-04-11 00:20 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-04-09 21:31 BUG #16958: "Invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table" when qualifying columns in "on conflict .. where" PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
2021-04-10 07:57 ` Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
2021-04-10 10:28   ` Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
2021-04-10 16:28     ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2021-04-10 16:54       ` Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
2021-04-11 00:20         ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox