Re: ROWS FROM(): A Foolish (In)Consistency?

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:16:13AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:03 AM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:52:05AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> >> > On 10/19/15 1:07 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> What I'd like to do is lift the restriction on ROWS FROM(), which
> >> >> currently requires that the stuff inside the parentheses set-returning
> >> >> functions, so constructs something like the following would actually work:
> >> >>
> >> >> SELECT *
> >> >> FROM
> >> >> ROWS FROM (
> >> >> (VALUES (...), ..., (...)),
> >> >> (SELECT ... ),
> >> >> (INSERT ... RETURNING ... ),
> >> >> my_srf()
> >> >> )
> >> >> AS t(...)
> >> >>
> >> >> would actually work.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > There's been a few places where I would have found that handy.
> >>
> >> Why not just use a subquery with UNION ALL?
> >
> > Because UNION ALL glues the queries vertically, not horizontally.
>
> Ah. I get it now. Thanks for clarifying.

Sorry that didn't start out clearer.

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