Horton

Re: BUG #17646: create rule named "_RETURN" will cause pg core

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

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Ilya Anfimov <ilan@tzirechnoy.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2022-10-17T14:41:35Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs 
Ilya Anfimov <ilan@tzirechnoy.com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:17:55AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (Although the core dump is also not great --- something should've noticed
>> the bogosity of the plan earlier than this.)

>  Id doesn't look much of a plan bogosity,
> but rather implicit deletion of the "_RETURN" on select rule.

Right, but then since there's no applicable rule, we end up generating
a plan that tries to do a seqscan directly on the view relation,
which of course lacks storage.  Something should notice that a little
sooner than segfaulting because of rel->rd_tableam being NULL --- it's
not like we don't have hundreds of other sanity checks for not-really-
supposed-to-happen catalog corruption.

In versions before v12, I get something like

regression=# select * from v1;
ERROR:  could not open file "base/16384/49209": No such file or directory

which is a shade less bad, but still not great.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Reject non-ON-SELECT rules that are named "_RETURN".

  2. Guard against table-AM-less relations in planner.