Dennis Bjorklund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is > SELECT 42, srf(); > the same as > SELECT 42, * FROM srf(); > ?
No. > In my view the first version is an error. It's not like you can put a > normal table in the select list, so why can we put a set returning > function there? Ie, is it really a feature? To some extent it's a hangover from PostQUEL ... but there are things you can do with it that you can't currently do with SRFs in FROM. See for instance the "listchildren" example in the manual: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/static/xfunc-sql.html#AEN29503 regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
