Re: Polymorphic arguments and composite types
От | Stephan Szabo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Polymorphic arguments and composite types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20071005111655.N13527@megazone.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Polymorphic arguments and composite types (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Polymorphic arguments and composite types
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 10:59 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote: > > On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 10:32 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote: > > > > On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > > > > > > Because we already do exactly that here: > > > > > > > > > > select 1, (select col2 from c), 3; > > > > > > > > > > The inner select returns a ROW, yet we treat it as a single column > > > > > value. > > > > > > > > The inner select does not return a row. It's not a <row subquery>, it's a > > > > <scalar subquery>. > > > > > > Thanks Stephan, Tom already explained that. > > > > > > My comments above were in response to "Why would you think that?" > > > > Right, but I guess I couldn't see why you would consider that the same as > > treating a rowtype as a scalar, because when I look at that my brain > > converts that to a scalar subquery, so I guess I simply see the scalar. > > If we supported select 1, (select 2,3), select 4 giving something like > > (1,(2,3),4), I'd also have confusion over the case, but that should error. > > Well, my brain didn't... All I've said was that we should document it, > to help those people that don't know they're SQL standard as good as the > best people on this list. Where would you document this beyond 4.2 though? While I don't exactly like the wording of 4.2.9, it seems like it's already trying to say that.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: