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: 2017-01-19T18:06:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- no-srfs-in-tlists-cleanup-2.patch.gz (application/x-gzip) patch
- (unnamed) (text/plain)
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2017-01-18 16:56:46 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>> I have not actually looked at 0003 at all yet. So yeah, please post
>> for review after you're done rebasing.
> Here's a rebased and lightly massaged version.
I've read through this and made some minor improvements, mostly additional
comment cleanup. One thing I wanted to ask about:
@@ -4303,7 +4303,7 @@ inline_function(Oid funcid, Oid result_type, Oid result_collid,
/*
* Forget it if the function is not SQL-language or has other showstopper
- * properties. (The nargs check is just paranoia.)
+ * properties. (The nargs and retset checks are just paranoia.)
*/
if (funcform->prolang != SQLlanguageId ||
funcform->prosecdef ||
I thought this change was simply wrong, and removed it; AFAIK it's
perfectly possible to get here for set-returning functions, since
the planner does expression simplification long before it worries
about splitting out SRFs. Did you have a reason to think differently?
Other than that possible point, I think the attached is committable.
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