Re: CALL stmt, ERROR: unrecognized node type: 113 bug
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: CALL stmt, ERROR: unrecognized node type: 113 bug |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1431.1518187361@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: CALL stmt, ERROR: unrecognized node type: 113 bug ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: CALL stmt, ERROR: unrecognized node type: 113 bug
Re: CALL stmt, ERROR: unrecognized node type: 113 bug Re: CALL stmt, ERROR: unrecognized node type: 113 bug |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 6:23 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 12:02:57PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: >>> Blocking subqueries in CALL parameters is possible solution. > To me this feels like an interaction between two features that users are > going to expect to just work. Meh. It doesn't look significantly different to me than the restriction that you can't have sub-selects in CHECK expressions, index expressions, etc. Obviously we need a clean failure like you get for those cases. But otherwise it's an OK restriction that stems from exactly the same cause: we do not want to invoke the full planner in this context (and even if we did, we don't want to use the full executor to execute the result). regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: