Feedback-ID: ia2694551:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 12:53:25 +0200
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: "variable not found in subplan target list"
Message-ID: <20230330105325.y6uvpalspynf2frt@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+HiwqG6tbc2oadsbyyy24b2AL295XHQgyLRWghmA7u_SL1K8A@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20230330105325.y6uvpalspynf2frt%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-Mar-29, Amit Langote wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 3:39 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> > > So I'm back home and found a couple more weird errors in the log:
> >
> > > ERROR:  mismatching PartitionPruneInfo found at part_prune_index 0
> > > DETALLE:  plan node relids (b 1), pruneinfo relids (b 36)
> >
> > This one reproduces for me.
> 
> I've looked into this one and the attached patch fixes it for me.
> Turns out set_plan_refs()'s idea of when the entries from
> PlannerInfo.partPruneInfos are transferred into
> PlannerGlobal.partPruneInfo was wrong.

Thanks for the patch. I've pushed it to github for CI testing, and if
there are no problems I'll put it in.

> Though, I wonder if we need to keep ec386948948 that introduced the
> notion of part_prune_index around if the project that needed it [1]
> has moved on to an entirely different approach altogether, one that
> doesn't require hacking up the pruning code.

Hmm, that's indeed tempting.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/