On Mon, 30 May 2022 at 14:45, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Mon, 30 May 2022 at 14:19, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> I was sort of wondering why we allow SRFs in this context in the
> >> first place. The results don't seem terribly well-defined to me.
>
> > Do you think it would fly to add such a restriction in the backbranches?
>
> We could leave it alone in the back branches on the grounds that if
> you like the results you get, we shouldn't break it in a minor
> release.
I struggle to see how anyone would like their result correctness to
depend on whether remove_unused_subquery_outputs() is able or unable
to remove a column from the subquery.
David
