| From: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: UNNEST with multiple args, and TABLE with multiple funcs |
| Date: | 2013-11-19 19:13:21 |
| Message-ID: | 87hab8yzq9.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
Tom> BTW, the reason we need to store the column count explicitly is
Tom> that we have to ignore the added columns if a composite type has
Tom> had an ADD COLUMN done to it since the RTE was made. The
Tom> submitted patch fails rather nastily in such cases, if the
Tom> composite type isn't last in the function list.
Am I understanding correctly that the only reason this didn't fail
before we added ORDINALITY is that the executor in general does not
care if there are more columns in a tuple than it expects? And that
adding ORDINALITY broke this already?
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-11-19 19:50:28 | Re: UNNEST with multiple args, and TABLE with multiple funcs |
| Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2013-11-19 19:08:26 | Re: Data corruption issues using streaming replication on 9.0.14/9.2.5/9.3.1 |