Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design

2017-03-28 14:18 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:

>
>
> 2017-03-28 13:58 GMT+02:00 Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>> can you help with fixing it Pavel?
>>
>
> There must be some new preanalyze stage - you have to know result columns
> before you are starting a analyze
>

maybe some recheck after analyze stage to remove invalid columns can be
good enough.

Regards

Pavel

>
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> fresh update - I enhanced Value node by location field as Tom proposal.
>>>
>>> Few more regress tests.
>>>
>>> But I found significant issue, that needs bigger fix - Surafel, please,
>>> can you fix it.
>>>
>>> It crash on
>>>
>>> SELECT 0 AS x1, 1 AS a, 0 AS x2, 2 AS b, 0 AS x3, -1 AS x3
>>> UNION ALL CORRESPONDING SELECT 4 AS b, 0 AS x4, 3 AS a, 0 AS x6, -1 AS
>>> x6
>>> UNION ALL CORRESPONDING SELECT 0 AS x8, 6 AS b, -100 AS x9;
>>>
>>> I'll mark this patch as waiting on author
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Pavel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>