| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: row literal problem |
| Date: | 2012-07-18 19:30:05 |
| Message-ID: | 29564.1342639805@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 07/18/2012 03:18 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> there are no null fields, right? if the last field is sometimes null
>> you'd see that (you probably ruled that out though). when you say
>> 'sometimes', do you mean for some rows and not others? or for some
>> queries?
> No, the inner query has two fields.
> It happens for all rows, but not for all two-field-resulting queries as
> q. I'm trying to find a simple case rather than the rather complex query
> my customer is using.
I'm wondering about a rowtype with a third, dropped column.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-18 19:59:49 | bgwriter, regression tests, and default shared_buffers settings |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2012-07-18 19:27:45 | Re: row literal problem |