I wrote: > David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: >> WITH RECURSIVE t(j) AS ( >> WITH RECURSIVE s(i) AS ( >> VALUES (1) >> UNION ALL >> SELECT i+1 FROM s WHERE i < 10 >> ) SELECT i AS j FROM s >> UNION ALL >> SELECT j+1 FROM t WHERE j < 10 >> ) >> SELECT * FROM t; >> ERROR: relation "s" does not exist >> LINE 6: ) SELECT i AS j FROM s >> ^ >> Shouldn't this work?
> Huh, nice test case. It looks like it's trying to do the "throwaway > parse analysis" of the nonrecursive term (around line 200 of > parse_cte.c) without having analyzed the inner WITH clause. We could > probably fix it by doing a throwaway analysis of the inner WITH too > ... but ... that whole throwaway thing is pretty ugly and objectionable > from a performance standpoint anyhow. I wonder if it wouldn't be better > to refactor so that transformSetOperationStmt knows when it's dealing > with the body of a recursive UNION and does the analyzeCTETargetList > business after having processed the first UNION arm. I've committed a fix along those lines. Too late for 8.4.1 unfortunately :-(. In the meantime, you could work around the problem in this particular case with some more parentheses: WITH RECURSIVE t(j) AS ( ( WITH RECURSIVE s(i) AS ( VALUES (1) UNION ALL SELECT i+1 FROM s WHERE i < 10 ) SELECT i AS j FROM s ) UNION ALL SELECT j+1 FROM t WHERE j < 10 ) SELECT * FROM t; regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers