Re: Adding CORRESPONDING to Set Operations
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Kerem Kat <keremkat@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-09-25T16:50:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Create a separate grantable privilege for TRUNCATE, rather than having it be
- a0b76dc662ef 8.4.0 cited
Kerem Kat <keremkat@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 19:51, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Why? CORRESPONDING at a given set-operation level doesn't affect either >> sub-query, so I don't see why you'd need a different representation for >> the sub-queries. > In the planner to construct a subquery out of SetOperationStmt or > RangeTblRef, a new RangeTblRef is needed. > To create a RangeTableRef, parser state is needed and planner assumes > root->parse->rtable be not modified > after generating simple_rte_array. Actually, after looking at the code again, I don't think you need any of that, since there's already a SubqueryScan node being inserted into the plan. You just need to improve generate_setop_tlist so that it can deal with cases where the mapping from subplan targetlist to the setop output columns isn't one-to-one. regards, tom lane