On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 11:37:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > 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 :-(.
I just wish I'd found it sooner :) Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers