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

Re: wCTE: why not finish sub-updates at the end, not the beginning?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: wCTE: why not finish sub-updates at the end, not the beginning?
Date: 2011-02-26 03:12:02
Message-ID: 2681.1298689922@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> What's the effect, if any, on CTEs that depend on each other
> explicitly?

An error.  That would require mutual recursion, which we don't
support for the SELECT case let alone data-modifying statements.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2011-02-26 03:16:36
Subject: Re: wCTE: why not finish sub-updates at the end, not the beginning?
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2011-02-26 02:50:27
Subject: Re: wCTE: about the name of the feature

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