On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 at 16:12, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> wrote: > > It doesn't play that well if you have something called subquery though: > > [example that changes a user-provided alias] > > While the output is a valid query, it's not nice that it's replacing a > user provided alias with another one (or force an alias if you have a > relation called subquery).
It's already the case that user-provided aliases can get replaced by new ones in the query-deparsing code, e.g.:
Regardless, is there any reason to not just prefix our made-up aliases with "pg_" to make it perfectly clear they were generated by the system and are basically implementation details as opposed to something that appeared in the originally written query?
I suppose, "because we've haven't until now, so why start" suffices...but still doing a rename/suffixing because of query rewriting and inventing one where we made it optional seem different enough to justify implementing something different.
