From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Manuel Rigger <rigger(dot)manuel(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: GROUP BY and inheritance issue |
Date: | 2019-07-03 22:11:55 |
Message-ID: | CAKJS1f-aO06wUzjtgUrEmH9vayZf-Uq21=aV-NLaWCV2X36zhA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 01:13, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 00:47, Manuel Rigger <rigger(dot)manuel(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Consider the example below:
> >
> > CREATE TABLE t0(c0 INT PRIMARY KEY, c1 INT);
> > CREATE TABLE t1(c0 INT) INHERITS (t0);
> > INSERT INTO t0(c0, c1) VALUES(0, 0);
> > INSERT INTO t1(c0, c1) VALUES(0, 1);
> > SELECT c0, c1 FROM t0 GROUP BY c0, c1; -- expected: 0|0 and 0|1, actual: 0|0
> >
> > Note that column c0 in t0 and t1 are merged. The GROUP BY clause above
> > causes only one row to be fetched, while I'd expect that both are
> > fetched (which is the behavior when no GROUP BY is used). Section
> > 5.9.1 [1] in the documentation mentions some caveats of using
> > inheritance, also stating that the PRIMARY KEY is not inherited. Is
> > this some implication of this or a bug?
>
> Thanks for the report. This is a bug.
I've pushed a fix for this.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2019-07-03 22:50:17 | BUG #15892: URGENT: Using an ICU collation in a primary key column breaks ILIKE query |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-07-03 14:49:48 | Re: BUG #15891: Cannot alter columns and add constraints in one alter statement since 11.4 update |