Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 at 22:15, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> So just to clarify, you now agree with that fix instead of dropping
>> the new Asserts?
> Yes, I'm fine either way actually, because I think it's not
> particularly likely to come up in practice.
Cool, I'll take care of it in a bit. Thanks for the detailed
response.
(If this is in fact rare, and it probably is given that the manual
deprecates RETURNING WITH in rules, then it's likely not worth
the trouble to try to fix the query representation to keep the
aliases separate.)
regards, tom lane