Re: BUG #5681: Using set returning function as subrequest can result losing rows in result set

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Maksym Boguk" <Maxim(dot)Boguk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #5681: Using set returning function as subrequest can result losing rows in result set
Date: 2010-09-28 20:36:21
Message-ID: 28500.1285706181@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

"Maksym Boguk" <Maxim(dot)Boguk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Oops... two rows where function returned zero rows just disappeared.

Yup, that's expected. This is one of many reasons why set-returning
functions in the targetlist aren't an especially good idea.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexey Parshin 2010-09-28 21:12:40 Re: BUG #5680: Failure to start: too many private dirs demanded
Previous Message stagirus 2010-09-28 19:14:58 Re: [BUGS] Mapping Hibernate boolean to smallint(Postgresql)