Re: SQL-standard function body

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL-standard function body
Date: 2021-06-08 16:00:03
Message-ID: 1117915.1623168003@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 03:24:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Concretely, I think the right fix is per attached.

> +1, I agree that this approach is better.

Pushed.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-06-08 16:06:02 Re: pg14b1 stuck in lazy_scan_prune/heap_page_prune of pg_statistic
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-06-08 15:39:09 Re: A modest proposal vis hierarchical queries: MINUS in the column list