On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:32:49AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 11/12/20 11:12 AM, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > IMO It no worse than today's:
> >
> > select count(*), count(*) from (values (1), (2)) vals (v);
> > count | count
> > 2 | 2
> >
>
>
> I guess the difference here is that there's an extra level of
> indirection. So
>
> select x, j->>'x', j->>x from mytable
>
> would have 3 result columns all named x.
Yeah, I feel it would have to be something a user specifically asks for,
and we would have to say it would be the first or a random match of one
of the keys. Ultimately, it might be so awkward as to be useless.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
