Re: PostgreSQL 10 changes in exclusion constraints - did something change? CASE WHEN behavior oddity

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>, Regina Obe <lr(at)pcorp(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 10 changes in exclusion constraints - did something change? CASE WHEN behavior oddity
Date: 2017-06-13 01:03:31
Message-ID: 21643.1497315811@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> Possibly too hard to be precise enough in a hint, but a number of these
> could benefit from one suggesting moving things into FROM, using
> LATERAL.

Maybe "You might be able to move the set-returning function into a
LATERAL FROM item."?

> I'm kinda positively surprised at how non-invasive this turned out, I'd
> afraid there'd be a lot more verbosity to it. I think the improved
> error messages (message & location), are quite worthwhile an their own.

Yeah, me too --- I'm pretty pleased with the result.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2017-06-13 01:10:41 Re: pgrowlocks relkind check
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-06-13 00:59:44 Re: pg_subscription_rel entry can be updated concurrently