MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <19484-a3cb82c8cde3c8fa@postgresql.org>
 <CAJTYsWXY9C3B-7NZw72OKen2L2rZt=c-t6=kjTJzgj=ZaNPe8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <DIPI7GSQFV1C.20OALZACS6KLI@gmail.com>
 <CA+FpmFc10Dtnr9dr=xqK2cNYQ4-1VuOyvOT7-eqXPmiQJoyPew@mail.gmail.com>
 <DJ4M4TOUHLM0.B38DAVN79FPH@gmail.com>
 <CAJTYsWWUfgCZau2fvrZVruXmC+dyOx45L=TyaGzXdywsywDyHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <DJ5BM93JVJ7C.MQC43GITCBOY@gmail.com>
 <CA+HiwqHVMY1a5E+6Ei369+RqQ8qKSSgon_C=3yBk-TPJDwZ2nQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+HiwqHjUO0uXFZ2dECJiNime6B1FDL5+mJ=XN+1XgzkY=m9DA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPmGK16GNiwcnAxM3XU=ZTOP_8oiv7_FOUwo5hZp8b+qfv2L7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+HiwqEVwEPSE4yMvuwVT5bb+ziMHLfqd_HuiQPAFAixNHbhrQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+HiwqHO0Bbi6cyk4F+UGvZEV3NEo7o0YT3-Js7K7hvasoWBVw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPmGK16fALJqbyR1Oir7-TsN8k_yAR-JcOg5nWOUmDmivTmDtA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAPmGK16fALJqbyR1Oir7-TsN8k_yAR-JcOg5nWOUmDmivTmDtA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 19:55:05 +0900
Message-ID: 
 <CAPmGK14Qh_Wb4GNPNkZ1o9=vTcMKShzPNSWa=wNf9vJpg8qT+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: BUG #19484: Segmentation fault triggered by FDW
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Cc: Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97@gmail.com>,
 Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari.slg01@gmail.com>,
	Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>, 798604270@qq.com,
	pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, Amit Langote <amitlan@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPmGK14Qh_Wb4GNPNkZ1o9%3DvTcMKShzPNSWa%3DwNf9vJpg8qT%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Sorry, I accidentally sent this before I finished writing.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 7:50=E2=80=AFPM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.=
com> wrote:
>
> Amit-san,
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 6:16=E2=80=AFPM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail=
.com> wrote:
> > A small clarification on this one: the patch makes no changes to
> > postgres_fdw code, only adds a regression test. The bug, which I
> > introduced, is in how nodeModifyTable.c supplies fdw_private from the
> > pruned/validated fdwPrivLists in ModifyTableState rather than the
> > original list in ModifyTable, so the postgres_fdw side itself is
> > unchanged. The substantive change is the executor re-indexing.
>
> Thanks for the clarification!
>
> > Still holding off on committing per our exchange, but no rush given
> > you may want to prioritize the v19 open items. Happy to go ahead
> > whenever, or wait for your comments.

Actually, I've just started reviewing the patch.  I'll let you know
the results (if any) by tomorrow.  Thanks for the consideration as
well.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita