1
0
mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres.git synced 2025-05-28 05:21:27 +03:00

3 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Tom Lane
dede143997 Don't elide casting to typmod -1.
Casting a value that's already of a type with a specific typmod
to an unspecified typmod doesn't do anything so far as run-time
behavior is concerned.  However, it really ought to change the
exposed type of the expression to match.  Up to now,
coerce_type_typmod hasn't bothered with that, which creates gotchas
in contexts such as recursive unions.  If for example one side of
the union is numeric(18,3), but it needs to be plain numeric to
match the other side, there's no direct way to express that.

This is easy enough to fix, by inserting a RelabelType to update the
exposed type of the expression.  However, it's a bit nervous-making
to change this behavior, because it's stood for a really long time.
But no complaints have emerged about 14beta3, so go ahead and
back-patch.

Back-patch of 5c056b0c2 into previous supported branches.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CABNQVagu3bZGqiTjb31a8D5Od3fUMs7Oh3gmZMQZVHZ=uWWWfQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1488389.1631984807@sss.pgh.pa.us
2021-09-20 11:48:52 -04:00
Tom Lane
cf20cc00a9 Add some test cases to improve test coverage of parse_expr.c.
I chanced to notice while thumbing through lcov reports that we had
exactly no coverage of BETWEEN SYMMETRIC, nor of current_time(N) and
localtime(N).  Improve that.

parse_expr.c still has a pretty awful coverage number, but a large part
of that is due to lack of coverage of the operator_precedence_warning
logic.  I have zero desire to write tests for that; I think ripping it
out would be more sensible at this point.
2019-07-05 23:56:34 -04:00
Andres Freund
ce38949ba2 Improve expression evaluation test coverage.
Upcoming patches are revamping expression evaluation significantly. It
therefore seems prudent to try to ensure that the coverage of the
existing evaluation code is high.

This commit adds coverage for the cases that can reasonably be
tested. There's still a bunch of unreachable error messages and such,
but otherwise this achieves nearly full regression test coverage (with
the exception of the unused GetAttributeByNum/GetAttributeByName).

Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170310194021.ek4bs4bl2khxkmll@alap3.anarazel.de
2017-03-11 15:41:34 -08:00