Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Yeah, I agree --- personally I'd never write a query like that. But
>> the fact that somebody ran into it when v10 has been out for barely
>> a week suggests that people are doing it.
> Not exactly -- Julien's bug report was about a *qualified* reference
> being incorrectly rejected.
Nonetheless, he was using a CTE name equivalent to the name of the
query's target table. That's already confusing IMV ... and it does
not seem unreasonable to guess that he only qualified the target
because it stopped working unqualified.
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
