From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>,
 feichanghong <feichanghong@qq.com>,
        pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #19056: ExecInitPartitionExecPruning segfault due to NULL
 es_part_prune_infos
In-reply-to: 
 <CAApHDvpNdY9n7Q=-RJ1uYCuYQ1o7_uTbUYmQTQMAx5Rhh3Shug@mail.gmail.com>
References: <19056-a677cef9b54d76a0@postgresql.org>
 <CAApHDvoUketXqPj=1TpE81qPHvNj2fXRNomx2h7OkEm4nGqRcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAApHDvpNWPQU790AKFsMpSj4-fK1k7K78jigtPAXneiVT1_BBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+HiwqG7Heq9WuzwtNixdqYEOAgcEgmx7dQGkGE0Bwt3v0EBXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <tencent_E6CAC49A0307E15909E4DD2DA3AA13E12305@qq.com>
 <CA+HiwqF+szimhYVh0F4vZJd0v6qViDs9zqvanjjsUCU8UjMNnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+HiwqGzUmLfMU3zoZWN2U31gsY57zULzds8MoX2uocd1yu_hg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAApHDvpNdY9n7Q=-RJ1uYCuYQ1o7_uTbUYmQTQMAx5Rhh3Shug@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
	message dated "Thu, 18 Sep 2025 15:47:37 +1200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1836970.1758168660.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 00:11:00 -0400
Message-ID: <1836971.1758168660@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1836971.1758168660%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 15:37, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wr=
ote:
>> +# Test that EState.es_part_prune_infos is properly set in EvalPlanQual=
Start()
>> +# Bug #19056

> I don't think it's that useful to note down the bug number that caused
> that test to be added.

We're inconsistent about whether we do that or not, but it's
far from un-heard-of.  I just today pushed a patch in which
I did mention the bug# in the test case [1], and I did so
mostly because the adjacent test case had a similar comment.
So I see no reason to object to Amit's usage.

> I think it'd be better to write something like:
> "Exercise run-time partition pruning code in an EPQ plan"

Not expressing an opinion about whether that's better or
worse than Amit's lede.

			regards, tom lane

[1] https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=3Dpostgresql.git;a=3Dcommitdiff;h=
=3Db0cc0a71e0a0a760f54c72edb8cd000e4555442b