Re: [HACKERS] Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (was Changed SRF in targetlist handling)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (was Changed SRF in targetlist handling) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1080.1484776606@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (was Changed SRF in targetlist handling) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (was Changed SRF in targetlist handling)
Re: [HACKERS] Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (wasChanged SRF in targetlist handling) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > There's one sgml comment you'd added: > "Furthermore, nested set-returning functions did not work at all." > I'm not quite sure what you're referring to there - it was previously > allowed to have one set argument to an SRF: Ooops ... that was composed too hastily, evidently. Will fix. I'll try to write something about the SRF-in-CASE issue too. Seeing whether we can document that adequately seems like an important part of making the decision about whether we need to block it. > Working on rebasing the cleanup patch now. Interested in reviewing > that? Otherwise I think I'll just push the rebased version of what I'd > posted before, after making another pass through it. I have not actually looked at 0003 at all yet. So yeah, please post for review after you're done rebasing. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: