Pavel Stehule <[email protected]> writes:
> I got a bug report for plpgsql_check related to domains of composite types.
> While I played with code, maybe I found a bug:
Indeed. Looks like exec_stmt_return's special case for a simple
variable reference forgets to fill estate->rettype when the variable
is a null record. This is an old bug, but I think we'd managed not
to notice because that value isn't consulted unless we have to cast
to a domain.
The behavior we want is what exec_eval_datum does, and after looking
at it for a minute I wondered why we don't just use exec_eval_datum
instead of duplicating logic. The ROW case already does that, so
we can fix the bug with strictly less code.
regards, tom lane
diff --git a/src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c b/src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c
index f80264e184e..723048ab833 100644
--- a/src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c
+++ b/src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_exec.c
@@ -3255,28 +3255,14 @@ exec_stmt_return(PLpgSQL_execstate *estate, PLpgSQL_stmt_return *stmt)
}
break;
- case PLPGSQL_DTYPE_REC:
- {
- PLpgSQL_rec *rec = (PLpgSQL_rec *) retvar;
-
- /* If record is empty, we return NULL not a row of nulls */
- if (rec->erh && !ExpandedRecordIsEmpty(rec->erh))
- {
- estate->retval = ExpandedRecordGetDatum(rec->erh);
- estate->retisnull = false;
- estate->rettype = rec->rectypeid;
- }
- }
- break;
-
case PLPGSQL_DTYPE_ROW:
+ case PLPGSQL_DTYPE_REC:
{
- PLpgSQL_row *row = (PLpgSQL_row *) retvar;
+ /* exec_eval_datum can handle these cases */
int32 rettypmod;
- /* We get here if there are multiple OUT parameters */
exec_eval_datum(estate,
- (PLpgSQL_datum *) row,
+ retvar,
&estate->rettype,
&rettypmod,
&estate->retval,
