On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 8:59 AM Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>
> So if we then say:
>
>
> select x, j->>x from mytable;
>
>
> you want both result columns named x? That seems like a recipe for
> serious confusion. I really don't think this proposal has been properly
> thought through.
>
>
IMO It no worse than today's:
select count(*), count(*) from (values (1), (2)) vals (v);
count | count
2 | 2
David J.