On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I guess that means I have to go back to extending the grammar again :-). > > I await the results with interest. Did you note the suggestion about > trying to stress the ON CONFLICT code with this? You'd need it to > issue non-SELECT queries, which might create some reproducibility > issues...
About 80% of the bugs we've seen so far are the type that a tool like sqlsmith could plausibly catch: bugs that trigger defensive "can't happen" elog(ERROR, ... ) calls within the planner and rewriter. While I've been vigilant, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if more were found, given the total flexibility of the ON CONFLICT syntax. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
