Feedback-ID: ie3de48e3:Fastmail
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 15:34:38 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
	Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
 PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>,
	kristianlejao@gmail.com
Subject: Re: TRAP: failed Assert("outerPlan != NULL") in postgres_fdw.c
Message-ID: <202509261330.5acuwmf57rvu@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAPmGK14sTPK4bz9ii_wQ2L6Z+i+zdjPBE7rMHrbiL6uGQdWL=g@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202509261330.5acuwmf57rvu%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2025-Sep-24, Etsuro Fujita wrote:

> I took a quick glance at the patch.  My initial comment is: it only
> includes the test case discussed here, but I think it's a good idea to
> add more cases in it (that exercise code paths in
> postgresRecheckForeignScan), as I mentioned upthread.  What do you
> think about that?  If no objections, I'd like to update it to include
> such cases.

I would like to suggest a different approach: because this patch is
known to fix a server crash in a known case, it would be better to get
the fix (and its corresponding test) pushed as is without further delay.
Additional tests are an excellent idea, but I think we shouldn't make
this patch wait for them.  If further fixes are deemed necessary for
those other (thus far hypothetical) tests, we can still make them
afterwards.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/