Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: > >> 2. The patch didn't touch the implicit-RTE code, which means that >> >> WITH q AS ( SELECT ... ) >> SELECT q.* >> >> will fail even if you've got add_missing_from enabled. I'm inclined >> to think that this violates the principle of least surprise. On >> the other hand, add_missing_from is certainly a legacy thing and maybe >> we shouldn't bother expending any extra code to make it work with >> new features. Thoughts? > > Yes, it's legacy. I wouldn't bother.
The results would be even more suprising if there *is* a table named "q" though... -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
