| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Query fails when SRFs are part of FROM clause (Commit id: 69f4b9c85f) |
| Date: | 2017-03-09 19:46:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20170309194605.GR9812@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom, all,
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> If you don't want to make ExecInitExpr responsible, then the planner would
> >> have to do something like split_pathtarget_at_srf anyway to decompose the
> >> expressions, no matter which executor representation we use.
>
> > Did we do anything about this? Are we going to?
>
> No, and I think we should. Is it on the v10 open items list?
Wasn't, I've added it now:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_10_Open_Items
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sven R. Kunze | 2017-03-09 20:09:20 | Re: adding an immutable variant of to_date |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-09 19:41:41 | Re: Query fails when SRFs are part of FROM clause (Commit id: 69f4b9c85f) |