From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
        PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: sqlsmith: ERROR: XX000: bogus varno: 2
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+HiwqFLonz9AnjixmatcOF6ryKyywXqYW4S6Eu0s8gtZ4pMgg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20211219205422.GT17618@telsasoft.com>
 <2209221.1639948636@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmobHkyGKM_DOgzGbh7BiWXdBGLMTnmB2S_FyyNHgqTxqBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <2445883.1640017555@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+Tgmoa7JFTYxM4AJEk+bM_J4Y+1sxQY+rAN3wE+ZmkbqWkCEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2524668.1640024031@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+Tgmob2wVbfj47aqFxYeTuP_rcO45dip_GU-Hz=BSxu4POgXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <2598851.1640028995@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoYz=M+2Z-heoBzJHAzs6heY=4icZ=-b5z6d2+XUw5CeRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2657967.1640035211@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+HiwqFLonz9AnjixmatcOF6ryKyywXqYW4S6Eu0s8gtZ4pMgg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
	message dated "Thu, 06 Jan 2022 15:43:59 +0900"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1070416.1641482649.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 10:24:09 -0500
Message-ID: <1070417.1641482649@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1070417.1641482649%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> writes:
> Thanks for addressing that in the patch you posted.  I guess fixing
> only expression_tree_walker/mutator() suffices for now, but curious to
> know if it was intentional that you decided not to touch the following
> sites:

> exprCollation(): it would perhaps make sense to return the collation
> assigned to the 1st element of listdatums/lowerdatums/upperdatums,
> especially given that transformPartitionBoundValue() does assign a
> collation to the values in those lists based on the parent's partition
> key specification.

But each column could have a different collation, no?  I do not
think it's sensible to pick one of those at random and claim
that's the collation of the whole thing.  So throwing an error
seems appropriate.

> exprType(): could be handled similarly

The same, in spades.  Anybody who is asking for "the type"
of a relpartbound is misguided.

> queryjumble.c: JumbleExpr(): whose header comment says:

If somebody needs that, I wouldn't object to adding support there.
But right now it would just be dead code, so why bother?

			regards, tom lane