On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>> Sorry for coming up late in the game. I can see that you have pushed a
>> patch as d5b760e, but back-paddled a bit on d76886c. After some
>> analysis of things around, I think that you got it right. One comment
>> I have first though is that you could have used forboth as there is no
>> point to go through the target list entries once there are no more
>> aliases. Or target list entries marked as resjunk do not have an
>> expended reference name?
>
> Right, there's no entry in the outer RTE for resjunk columns.
>
> (In practice, resjunk entries are at the end of the tlist so that it
> wouldn't really matter, but I try to keep code from assuming that.)
OK, thanks for confirming. Yes the current logic is better this way.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
