Re: Review: UNNEST (and other functions) WITH ORDINALITY
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Review: UNNEST (and other functions) WITH ORDINALITY |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20130724180115.GE10713@alap2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Review: UNNEST (and other functions) WITH ORDINALITY (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Review: UNNEST (and other functions) WITH ORDINALITY
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-07-24 13:36:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> If it weren't that we've been speculating for years about deprecating > >> SRFs-in-tlists once we had LATERAL, I would personally consider this > >> patch DOA in this form. > > > I guess I'd sort of assumed that the plan was to continue accepting > > SRFs in tlists but rewrite them as lateral joins, rather than getting > > rid of them altogether. > > That seems to me to be unlikely to happen, because it would be > impossible to preserve the current (admittedly bad) semantics. > If we're going to change the behavior at all we might as well just > drop the feature, IMO. I think removing the feature will be a rather painful procedure for users and thus will need a rather long deprecation period. The amount of code using SRFs in targetlists is quite huge if my experience is anything to go by. And much of that can trivially/centrally be rewritten to LATERAL, not to speak of the cross-version compatibility problem. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: