| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sebastion Calbaza <sebastian(dot)calbaza(at)hgdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #14648: counts for queries using array unnesting is incorrect |
| Date: | 2017-05-15 14:57:46 |
| Message-ID: | 14109.1494860266@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Yes, its intentional, and it isn't specific to just the unnest function so
> documenting it just there doesn't seem correct. I don't know where it is
> documented but I suspect that even just reading the documentation for this
> would be of minimal help - I think its likely best learned after
> experiencing the aforementioned problem.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/xfunc-sql.html#XFUNC-SQL-FUNCTIONS-RETURNING-SET
The last example in section 36.4.8 covers this specifically.
I've felt more than once that having these sorts of details about function
semantics underneath the "extending SQL" chapter isn't right, but I'm not
sure what organization would be better. A lot of the examples would be
tough to do without use of custom-made functions.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-05-15 14:58:16 | Re: BUG #14655: PostgreSQL 9.6 not compatible with QTS latest release |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-05-15 14:51:50 | Re: BUG #14648: counts for queries using array unnesting is incorrect |