On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:31:51 +0300 Teodor Sigaev <teo...@sigaev.ru> wrote:
> > AFAICS, we'd just have to revert this patch later, so I don't see > > much value in it. > True, I suppose we should apply this patch just for consistency, because we > don't allow expression in included columns. Yes, this is what I intend in my patch, but I don't persist in this if there is a reason to leave the code as it is, since the current code is alomot harmless. Thanks, -- Yugo Nagata <nag...@sraoss.co.jp>
