Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design

From: Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design
Date: 2017-03-14 15:33:08
Message-ID: CALAY4q-CsJj=DHY8ztCn3bTAbJM43hKh8nV3L-+ru1G_n0muZQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

hi

Some errors are related to just CORRESPONDING without any columns. So using
> expr doesn't help here. So parse node CORRESPONDING can solve both issues.
>
>
In current implementation pointing to a node means pointing to a node’s
first element so I don’t think we can be able to point to CORRESPONDING
without any columns

I find out that there is already a node prepare for the case called A_Const.
The attached patch use that node

Regards
Surafel

Attachment Content-Type Size
corresponding_clause_v5.patch application/octet-stream 59.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-03-14 15:40:16 Re: scram and \password
Previous Message Joe Conway 2017-03-14 15:30:25 Re: scram and \password