Horton

Re: Fix unqualified catalog references in psql describe queries

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Date: 2026-06-10T02:12:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2026 at 09:08:50AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
>> Now I wonder if we shoud not "protect" the operators too. They could also
>> lead to wrong results (if not worst).

> Kind of true.  Still we have been pretty lax about the operators as
> they also lead to less readable queries.

We disclaimed security against odd search_paths for these queries long ago,
precisely because wrapping every operator in PG_OPERATOR(pg_catalog.*)
would be far too tedious and destructive of readability --- not to
mention that there are some syntaxes such as IN that don't even offer
the option to do that.

I'm okay with schema-qualifying these table references, mainly because
that preserves consistency with historical style here.  But let's not
go further than that.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. psql: Add some missing schema qualifications in describe.c

  2. SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)

  3. CREATE SUBSCRIPTION ... SERVER.