On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 01:39:27AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>
> >> I'm +1 for backpatching it. It may be operating as designed by
> >> PeterE ten years ago, but it's not operating as designed by the SQL
> >> standard.
>
> Tom> By that argument, *anyplace* where we're missing a SQL-spec
> Tom> feature is a back-patchable bug. I don't buy it.
>
> But this is a feature we already claimed to actually support (it's
> listed in sql_features with a bunch of unqualified YES entries), but in
> fact doesn't work properly.
This looks like a bug fix to me, for what it's worth.
Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
