From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: "variable not found in subplan target list"
In-reply-to: <20230328181930.s7xbr326635y4sfc@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20230328181930.s7xbr326635y4sfc@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
	message dated "Tue, 28 Mar 2023 20:19:30 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3649816.1680028761.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 14:39:21 -0400
Message-ID: <3649817.1680028761@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3649817.1680028761%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

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.

> select  =

>       pg_catalog.pg_stat_get_buf_fsync_backend() as c9 =

>     from =

>       public.tenk2 as ref_0
>     where (ref_0.stringu2 is NULL) =

>       and (EXISTS (
>         select  1 from fkpart5.fk1 as ref_1
>           where pg_catalog.current_date() < (select pg_catalog.max(fille=
r3) from public.mcv_lists))) ;

> ERROR:  subplan "InitPlan 1 (returns $1)" was not initialized
> CONTEXTO:  parallel worker

Hmph, I couldn't reproduce that, not even with other settings of
debug_parallel_query.  Are you running it with non-default
planner parameters?

> select 1 as c0
> ...
> ERROR:  could not find commutator for operator 53286

I got a slightly different error:

ERROR:  missing support function 1(195306,195306) in opfamily 1976

where

regression=3D# select 195306::regtype;               =

  regtype   =

------------
 int8alias1
(1 row)

So that one is related to the intentionally-somewhat-broken
int8 opclass configuration that equivclass.sql leaves behind.
I've always had mixed emotions about whether leaving that
set up that way was a good idea or not.  In principle nothing
really bad should happen, but it can lead to confusing errors
like this one.  Maybe it'd be better to roll that back?

			regards, tom lane