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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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