5 Commits (b7e1ae2328f7d5a88d8916d78b4561d8ef16f99b)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Tom Lane	a3c7a993d5	Make INSERT-from-multiple-VALUES-rows handle targetlist indirection better. ... Previously, if an INSERT with multiple rows of VALUES had indirection (array subscripting or field selection) in its target-columns list, the parser handled that by applying transformAssignedExpr() to each element of each VALUES row independently. This led to having ArrayRef assignment nodes or FieldStore nodes in each row of the VALUES RTE. That works for simple cases, but in bug #14265 Nuri Boardman points out that it fails if there are multiple assignments to elements/fields of the same target column. For such cases to work, rewriteTargetListIU() has to nest the ArrayRefs or FieldStores together to produce a single expression to be assigned to the column. But it failed to find them in the top-level targetlist and issued an error about "multiple assignments to same column". We could possibly fix this by teaching the rewriter to apply rewriteTargetListIU to each VALUES row separately, but that would be messy (it would change the output rowtype of the VALUES RTE, for example) and inefficient. Instead, let's fix the parser so that the VALUES RTE outputs are just the user-specified values, cast to the right type if necessary, and then the ArrayRefs or FieldStores are applied in the top-level targetlist to Vars representing the RTE's outputs. This is the same parsetree representation already used for similar cases with INSERT/SELECT syntax, so it allows simplifications in ruleutils.c, which no longer needs to treat INSERT-from-multiple-VALUES as its own special case. This implementation works by applying transformAssignedExpr to the VALUES entries as before, and then stripping off any ArrayRefs or FieldStores it adds. With lots of VALUES rows it would be noticeably more efficient to not add those nodes in the first place. But that's just an optimization not a bug fix, and there doesn't seem to be any good way to do it without significant refactoring. (A non-invasive answer would be to apply transformAssignedExpr + stripping to just the first VALUES row, and then just forcibly cast remaining rows to the same data types exposed in the first row. But this way would lead to different, not-INSERT-specific errors being reported in casting failure cases, so it doesn't seem very nice.) So leave that for later; this patch at least isn't making the per-row parsing work worse, and it does make the finished parsetree smaller, saving rewriter and planner work. Catversion bump because stored rules containing such INSERTs would need to change. Because of that, no back-patch, even though this is a very long-standing bug. Report: <20160727005725.7438.26021@wrigleys.postgresql.org> Discussion: <9578.1469645245@sss.pgh.pa.us>	10 years ago
Robert Haas	97e8346851	Regression tests for TOAST. ... Kevin Grittner, per discussion of bug #5989	15 years ago
Tom Lane	d841cc44c5	A few regression tests for VALUES, from Gavin Sherry.	20 years ago
Bruce Momjian	dd4ca824cc	Reports missing values as bad. ... BAD: INSERT INTO tab (col1, col2) VALUES ('val1'); GOOD: INSERT INTO tab (col1, col2) VALUES ('val1', 'val2'); Regress tests against DEFAULT and normal values as they're managed slightly different. Rod Taylor	24 years ago
Bruce Momjian	97b4e5ad30	Add INSERT(..., DEFAULT, ). ... Rod Taylor	24 years ago