fix: Avoid assertion failure on divide-by-zero #20216
Merged
+10
−1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
neilconway
force-pushed
the
neilc/divide-zero-selectivity
branch
from
b0c5cb3 to
10073aa
Compare
A WHERE clause like `4==(3/0)` will not be optimized away, but will result in `context.selectivity` being `None`.
neilconway
force-pushed
the
neilc/divide-zero-selectivity
branch
from
10073aa to
7eabc7c
Compare
alamb
approved these changes
Feb 8, 2026
Contributor
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @neilconway (this is quite a streak you have coming)
Contributor
Author
Thanks for the reviews! (I decided to resuscitate the fuzzer, which is how I found these issues.) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A WHERE clause like
4==(3/0)will not be optimized away, but will result incontext.selectivitybeingNone.Which issue does this PR close?
Are these changes tested?
Added test case.