Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design
Date: 2017-03-11 06:01:58
Message-ID: CAFj8pRCspwFhF1JVD-GKJS0rsojBC1r6okFmDtfVKiSu2XwD0g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi

2017-03-10 13:49 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> Hi
>
> 2017-03-10 12:55 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>>
>>
>> 2017-03-10 10:13 GMT+01:00 Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>
>>> Yes, you are correct it should to work on CORRESPONDING clause case. SQL
>>> 20nn standard draft only said each query to be of the same degree in a case
>>> of set operation without corresponding clause. The attached patch is
>>> corrected as such .I add those new test case to regression test too
>>>
>>
>> Thank you - I will recheck it.
>>
>
> Fast check - it looks well
>

I am sending minor update - cleaning formatting and white spaces, error
messages + few more tests

It is working very well.

Maybe correspondingClause needs own node type with attached location. Then
context can be much better positioned.

Regards

Pavel

>
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>

Attachment Content-Type Size
corresponding_clause_v4.patch text/x-patch 58.6 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2017-03-11 06:04:06 Re: [HACKERS] Small issue in online devel documentation build
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2017-03-11 05:20:45 Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes