From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>,
        Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>, a.kozhemyakin@postgrespro.ru,
        pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #17570: Unrecognized node type for query with statistics on
 expressions
In-reply-to: 
 <ME3P282MB1667E822B3DEA81E46EEE11CB69F9@ME3P282MB1667.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <17570-f2f2e0f4bccf0965@postgresql.org>
 <CAMbWs4_PPrJ7JFXqewQfkMLP6-2kHi+5=11U0csQVTx7iq7esw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMbWs49MoDfQzbcmH4VWisTNVDfCuZcALPOzJxGac2UV5KVi7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <ME3P282MB1667E822B3DEA81E46EEE11CB69F9@ME3P282MB1667.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Comments: In-reply-to Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
	message dated "Thu, 04 Aug 2022 22:59:07 +0800"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3508844.1659627758.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2022 11:42:38 -0400
Message-ID: <3508845.1659627758@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3508845.1659627758%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> writes:
> Attached to new patch add a test-case from Alexander Kozhemyakin.

It appears to me that this is actually very thoroughly broken.

* statext_is_compatible_clause_internal is not on board with
offsetting the attnums.

* Neither is this check for a whole-row reference (line 1628, in HEAD):

		if (bms_is_member(InvalidAttrNumber, clause_attnums))

* Although the coverage report claims this code is exercised, the
fact that nothing failed when you made only a partial fix says it's
not exercised well enough.

* The comments for statext_is_compatible_clause suck.  If they'd
defined what the arguments are, perhaps this mess would have been
prevented.  For extra credit, it'd be really nice to define what
"is compatible" means.  I'd sure not have thought that that would
include permissions checks.

			regards, tom lane