Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design

hi

Thank you very much for your help .
here is the patch fix that issue as you suggest

Regards

Surafel

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

>
>
> 2017-03-28 14:18 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>>
>>
>> 2017-03-28 13:58 GMT+02:00 Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>
>>> can you help with fixing it Pavel?
>>>
>>
>> There must be some new preanalyze stage - you have to know result columns
>> before you are starting a analyze
>>
>
> maybe some recheck after analyze stage to remove invalid columns can be
> good enough.
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Pavel
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> fresh update - I enhanced Value node by location field as Tom proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Few more regress tests.
>>>>
>>>> But I found significant issue, that needs bigger fix - Surafel, please,
>>>> can you fix it.
>>>>
>>>> It crash on
>>>>
>>>> SELECT 0 AS x1, 1 AS a, 0 AS x2, 2 AS b, 0 AS x3, -1 AS x3
>>>> UNION ALL CORRESPONDING SELECT 4 AS b, 0 AS x4, 3 AS a, 0 AS x6, -1 AS
>>>> x6
>>>> UNION ALL CORRESPONDING SELECT 0 AS x8, 6 AS b, -100 AS x9;
>>>>
>>>> I'll mark this patch as waiting on author
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Pavel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>