On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 03:15:12PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Please note that this case fails with your patch, but the presence of
> IF NOT EXISTS should ensure that we don't fail and issue a NOTICE
> instead, no? Taking this case specifically (OK, I am playing with
> the rules a bit to insert data into the relation itself, still), this
> query may finish by adding tuples to the table whose creation should
> have been bypassed but the query got executed and inserted tuples.
> That's one example of behavior that may be confusing. There may be
> others, but it seems to me that it may be simpler to execute or even
> plan the query at all if the relation already exists.
Er.. Sorry. I meant here to *not* execute or even *not* plan the
query at all if the relation already exists.
--
Michael
