Re: Re: [SQL] aliases break my query
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Re: [SQL] aliases break my query |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 3661.959376868@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: [SQL] aliases break my query (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Re: [SQL] aliases break my query
Re: Re: [SQL] aliases break my query Re: Re: [SQL] aliases break my query |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Zeugswetter Andreas" <andreas.zeugswetter@telecom.at> writes:
> I think we could get agreement to not allow implicit from entries
> if there is a from clause in the statement, but allow them if a from clause
> is missing altogether. The patch did not distinguish the two cases.
Hmm, that's a thought. Taking it a little further, how about this:
"Emit a notice [or error if you insist] when an implicit FROM item is
added that refers to the same underlying table as any existing FROM
item."
95% of the complaints I can remember seeing were from people who got
confused by the behavior of "FROM table alias" combined with a reference
like "table.column". Seems to me the above rule would catch this case
without being obtrusive in the useful cases. Comments?
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: