| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ibrahim Shaame <ishaame(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "depesz(at)depesz(dot)com" <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, "pgsql-novice(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-novice(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding column in a recursive query |
| Date: | 2026-03-30 15:18:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwagw6CHy9qOVeDYeNa3_r8DpVTaR-u_xE9vGgw0EXQ7Sg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice |
On Monday, March 30, 2026, Ibrahim Shaame <ishaame(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Effectively, after removing the column names from x(jina, namba,
> nasaba_1) it works now. Thank you very much. But then I don't understand
> the advantage or inconvenience of naming or not naming the columns there.
> Is there any explanation somewhere?
>
SQL is big on providing ways to give aliases/names to things. It just
boils down to readability or, more often, conventions, as to which ones to
use. The CTE column names clause doesn’t get used much that I have seen.
You have to write a full query inside the CTE anyway so column aliases are
more conventional.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ibrahim Shaame | 2026-04-05 10:01:09 | Re: Adding column in a recursive query |
| Previous Message | Ibrahim Shaame | 2026-03-30 15:11:08 | Re: Adding column in a recursive query |