Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: why table.name is translated to (name.*)::name?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why table.name is translated to (name.*)::name?
Date: 2010-03-30 14:16:43
Message-ID: 16395.1269958603@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2010/3/30 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>> we can use a non existing column "name". What does mean?

> FYI this has caused me (and presumably a few other people) a bit of
> head-scratching, e.g.:
>   http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2010-03/msg00362.php

We could make that stop happening if we were willing to restrict the
cases in which an I/O conversion would be applied, but I think the cure
might be worse than the disease.  It would be an entirely arbitrary
restriction of a feature.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2010-03-30 14:38:41
Subject: Re: why table.name is translated to (name.*)::name?
Previous:From: Ian BarwickDate: 2010-03-30 14:03:33
Subject: Re: why table.name is translated to (name.*)::name?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group