>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>> So I can see exactly where the problem is, but I'm not sure what the >> solution should be. >> EvalPlanQualStart copies the param_exec value list explicitly _not_ >> including the execPlan link, which obviously isn't going to work if >> the value has not been computed yet. Should it be forcing the >> evaluation of initplans that haven't been run yet, or should the EPQ >> scan evaluate them itself from a copy of the plan, or does there >> need to be some way to share state? (having the InitPlan be run more >> than once might be a problem?) Tom> The second of those; what we need is for any referenced InitPlans Tom> to be executed afresh under EPQ rules. (I'm not entirely sure that Tom> an InitPlan could need to see different input tuples under EPQ Tom> than it'd see otherwise, but I'm not sure it couldn't, either.) Obviously you know this code better than I do... but I'm not convinced. Shouldn't the InitPlan pretty much by definition be independent of the tuples being locked/updated? And doesn't executing them again run the risk of getting a different value for other reasons, for example if an initplan is volatile? What I'm wondering is whether the param in the copied estate shouldn't rather be just a proxy for the one in the original estate - if we need to evaluate it, then do so in the original estate, store the value there, and copy the value back into the EPQ plantree. -- Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
