Re: Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (was Changed SRF in targetlist handling)
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-01-18T19:24:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2017-01-18 08:43:24 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> ... except for one thing. The more I look at it, >> the more disturbed I am by the behavioral change shown in rangefuncs.out >> --- that's the SRF-in-one-arm-of-CASE issue. > I'm fine with leaving it as is in the patch, but I'm also fine with > changing things to ERROR. Personally I don't think it matters much, and > we can whack it back and forth as we want later. Thus I'm inclined to > commit it without erroring out; since presumably we'll take some time > deciding on what exactly we want to prohibit. I agree. If we do decide to throw an error, it would best be done in parse analysis, and thus would be practically independent of this patch anyway. >> * This bit in ExecProjectSRF was no good: >> + else if (IsA(gstate->arg, FuncExprState) && >> + ((FuncExpr *) gstate->arg->expr)->funcretset) > Argh. That should have been FunExprState->func->fn_retset. Nope; that was my first thought as well, but fn_retset isn't valid if init_fcache hasn't been run yet, which it won't have been the first time through. So I think we can push this patch now and get on with the downstream patches. Do you want to do the honors, or shall I? regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Remove obsoleted code relating to targetlist SRF evaluation.
- ea15e18677fc 10.0 landed
-
Doc: improve documentation of new SRF-in-tlist behavior.
- f13a1277aa2d 10.0 landed
-
Move targetlist SRF handling from expression evaluation to new executor node.
- 69f4b9c85f16 10.0 landed
-
Don't split up SRFs when choosing to postpone SELECT output expressions.
- d543170f2fdd 9.6.0 cited