Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikk...@cs.helsinki.fi> writes:
> On 2011-02-26 2:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I've gone ahead and applied the code portion of the patch, with
>> modifications as per discussion, and other editorialization.

> Thanks a lot!

> One thing bothers me though: what was the reason for requiring a 
> RETURNING clause for data-modifying statements in WITH?

That test was in your patch, no?  I moved the code to another place
but it's still enforcing the same thing, namely that you can't reference
the output of an INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE that hasn't got RETURNING.

                        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

Reply via email to