Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 18:05:10 -0500
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Ronald Cruz <cruz@rentec.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, 'Peter Ford' <pford@rentec.com>,
	"Aaron J. Garcia" <agarcia@rentec.com>
Subject: Re: Query result differences between PostgreSQL 17 vs 16
Message-ID: <Z7kGplh70wbeX9su@momjian.us>
References: <f5320d3d-77af-4ce8-b9c3-4715ff33f213@rentec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <f5320d3d-77af-4ce8-b9c3-4715ff33f213@rentec.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z7kGplh70wbeX9su%40momjian.us>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 11:13:17AM -0500, Ronald Cruz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We have observed an issue after upgrading to PostgreSQL 17 that caused us to
> roll back to 16. Some of our queries are returning what I believe to be
> erroneous results.
> 
> I've attached two files here that can be used to reproduce what I'm seeing:
> 
> schema_plus_data.sql - This contains a pg_dump of a reproducible test case with
> a contrived schema and dataset of our use case.
> 
> reproducer.sql - This isn't necessary, but perhaps you find it helpful. This is
> a SQL script used to generate the schema and random data that hits this edge
> case. It was used to generate the previous file and it has reliably hit the
> issue so far from the handful of times I've tried.
> 
> The query I'm observing issues for is the following:
> 
> SELECT * FROM rc1
>     LEFT JOIN rc2 ON rc2.rc1_reference = rc1.description
>     LEFT JOIN rc3 ON rc2.id = rc3.rc2_reference
>     LEFT JOIN LATERAL rc_select(rc3.id) ON rc3.id IS NOT NULL;
> 
> Under PostgreSQL 17, I'm seeing ~400k results returned, whereas in PostgreSQL
> 16, I see ~6k. The results I believe to be erroneous are those that have 'BUG
> HIT' in the output for PostgreSQL 17. These are results joined from rc_select
> where rc3.id is null. I'm not expecting to see any of these rows as is the case
> in PostgreSQL 16 output (and 15 as well from prior experience).
> 
> I've observed this behavior in the latest PostgreSQL 17.4 but have also
> encountered this in 17.2 and 17.3. The OS being used is RHEL 9.5 (plow). Please
> let me know if you need any more information.

We have a known problem with composite types and NULL constraints in PG
17 that I think we are fixing in PG 18.  I saw IS NOT NULL in your
query so I thought I would mention it:

	https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z37p0paENWWUarj-%40momjian.us

We do have several NULL optimizations in PG 17.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.