On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:31:51 +0300
Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> wrote:
> > AFAICS, we'd just have to revert this patch later, so I don't see
> > much value in it.
> True, I suppose we should apply this patch just for consistency, because we
> don't allow expression in included columns.
Yes, this is what I intend in my patch, but I don't persist in this if there
is a reason to leave the code as it is, since the current code is alomot harmless.
Thanks,
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
