From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: CTE bug? |
Date: | 2009-09-09 18:40:26 |
Message-ID: | 20090909184026.GA8540@fetter.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 11:37:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> >> WITH RECURSIVE t(j) AS (
> >> WITH RECURSIVE s(i) AS (
> >> VALUES (1)
> >> UNION ALL
> >> SELECT i+1 FROM s WHERE i < 10
> >> ) SELECT i AS j FROM s
> >> UNION ALL
> >> SELECT j+1 FROM t WHERE j < 10
> >> )
> >> SELECT * FROM t;
> >> ERROR: relation "s" does not exist
> >> LINE 6: ) SELECT i AS j FROM s
> >> ^
> >> Shouldn't this work?
>
> > Huh, nice test case. It looks like it's trying to do the "throwaway
> > parse analysis" of the nonrecursive term (around line 200 of
> > parse_cte.c) without having analyzed the inner WITH clause. We could
> > probably fix it by doing a throwaway analysis of the inner WITH too
> > ... but ... that whole throwaway thing is pretty ugly and objectionable
> > from a performance standpoint anyhow. I wonder if it wouldn't be better
> > to refactor so that transformSetOperationStmt knows when it's dealing
> > with the body of a recursive UNION and does the analyzeCTETargetList
> > business after having processed the first UNION arm.
>
> I've committed a fix along those lines. Too late for 8.4.1
> unfortunately :-(. In the meantime, you could work around the
> problem in this particular case with some more parentheses:
>
> WITH RECURSIVE t(j) AS (
> (
> WITH RECURSIVE s(i) AS (
> VALUES (1)
> UNION ALL
> SELECT i+1 FROM s WHERE i < 10
> ) SELECT i AS j FROM s
> )
> UNION ALL
> SELECT j+1 FROM t WHERE j < 10
> )
> SELECT * FROM t;
>
> regards, tom lane
I tested this with deeper-nested structures, and ran across another question:
Should the outer query be able to reference further-in CTEs?
WITH RECURSIVE s(i) AS (
WITH RECURSIVE t(j) AS (
VALUES(1)
UNION ALL
SELECT j+1 FROM t WHERE j < 10
)
SELECT j AS i FROM t
UNION ALL
SELECT i+1 FROM s WHERE i < 10
)
SELECT * FROM s,t;
ERROR: relation "t" does not exist
LINE 11: SELECT * FROM s,t;
^
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-09-09 18:50:27 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
Previous Message | James Pye | 2009-09-09 18:31:02 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |