| From: | Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design |
| Date: | 2017-03-13 13:13:04 |
| Message-ID: | CALAY4q-8-S8R4LLYwvGCRcAmmhyYhVa0husooVRTutWe7UDYkA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> I am sending minor update - cleaning formatting and white spaces, error
> messages + few more tests
>
Thank you very much for your help
> Maybe correspondingClause needs own node type with attached location. Then
> context can be much better positioned.
>
I think we can solve it by using your option or using expr_list for
corresponding column and check the syntax manually.
In my opinion, the last option eliminate the introduction of new node for
only the sake of error position.
What did you think about the second option?
Regards
Surafel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mithun Cy | 2017-03-13 13:15:00 | Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm. |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-03-13 12:59:46 | Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes |