On Mon, 30 May 2022 at 15:02, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I'm not necessarily against adding the prohibition in the back
> branches. However, if this has been wrong since 10.x (if not
> further back) then it seems like few people are tripping over
> the inconsistency.
Yeah, perhaps. But we have received a report from 1 person and I think
it seems strange to adopt a policy that we require multiple bug
reports for the same issue before we consider fixing.
FWIW, just to demonstrate what a fix could look like, I've attached a
patch. I'm not planning to commit it if you really think we shouldn't
be fixing it.
The patch also does nothing for the weirdness that I described in the
DISTINCT ON case earlier in this thread.
David
