| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Odd error when using UNION and COLLATE |
| Date: | 2016-07-20 22:03:08 |
| Message-ID: | 28684.1469052188@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> But I think I agree that it's surprising that the collate clause isn't
> working in the ORDER BY on a column produced by a UNION. Certainly
> that's where people usually want to put it.
See this ancient comment in transformSetOperationStmt:
* For now, we don't support resjunk sort clauses on the output of a
* setOperation tree --- you can only use the SQL92-spec options of
* selecting an output column by name or number. Enforce by checking that
* transformSortClause doesn't add any items to tlist.
Perhaps sometime we ought to make an effort to relax that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2016-07-20 22:05:22 | Re: Odd error when using UNION and COLLATE |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2016-07-20 21:59:52 | Re: Odd error when using UNION and COLLATE |