Horton

Re: Increase value of OUTER_VAR

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>, Andrey Lepikhov <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-04-07T13:35:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 06.03.21 15:59, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> On 04.03.21 20:01, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> (2) Does that datatype change need to propagate anywhere besides
>>> what I touched here?  I did not make any effort to search for
>>> other places.
> 
>> I think
> 
>> Var.varnosyn
>> CurrentOfExpr.cvarno
> 
>> should also have their type changed.
> 
> Agreed as to CurrentOfExpr.cvarno.  But I think the entire point of
> varnosyn is that it saves the original rangetable reference and
> *doesn't* get overwritten with OUTER_VAR etc.  So that one is a
> different animal, and I'm inclined to leave it as Index.

Can we move forward with this?

I suppose there was still some uncertainty about whether all the places 
that need changing have been identified, but do we have a better idea 
how to find them?

Commits

  1. Remove arbitrary 64K-or-so limit on rangetable size.

  2. More cleanups of the include files