From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: When do we lose column names? |
Date: | 2012-02-07 20:03:03 |
Message-ID: | 7327.1328644983@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 02/07/2012 12:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In general I think we'd have to require that colnames be supplied in all
>> RowExprs if we go this way. Anyplace that's trying to slide by without
>> will have to be fixed. I don't recall how many places that is.
> I just had a thought that maybe we could make this simpler by dummying
> up a list of colnames if we don't have one, instead of that assertion.
> Or am I on the wrong track.
Well, if there are more than one or two RowExpr creators for which a
dummy set of colnames is the best we can do anyway, that might be a
reasonable answer. But I think it would encourage people to be lazy
and let the dummy colnames be used even when they can do better, so
I'd rather not take this as a first-choice solution.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marti Raudsepp | 2012-02-07 20:18:13 | Text-any concatenation volatility acting as optimization barrier |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-02-07 19:56:07 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?! |