On 05.02.2025 21:56, Tom Lane wrote:
It's not a bug. Since the call specifies NIL pathkeys (meaning it doesn't care about sort order) and does not insist on a parallel-safe path, there should always be a path that satisfies it. The only way it could fail to find a path is if the rel's pathlist is entirely empty, a case already rejected by the sole caller.Moreover, the argument that we might not have gotten a report is not credible. In a production build without an Assert, the next line would still dump core just as effectively if the result were NULL. While the proposed patch doesn't break anything, it's removing a logic cross-check that was put there intentionally. So I don't find it to be an improvement. regards, tom lane
Ah, if this Assert was intentionally added to ensure that a path must be always found under the given conditions, and that any issues with this can be detected in the right place, then I agree. The patch likely makes worse.
-- Best regards, Ilia Evdokimov, Tantor Labs LLC.
