On 18.9.2010 11:36, Arjen Nienhuis wrote:
> I'm not sure what you want but maybe it's this:
>
>
> => select * from (select t from t) sq;
> t
> -------
> (1,x)
> (1 row)
>
> => select (sq.t).* from (select t from t) sq;
> a | b
> ---+---
> 1 | x
> (1 row)
>
>
I know how to expand record to type or set by hand. That's not the issue.
I'm just trying to understand if changing type of record when alias is
different is intentional decision or unintentional.
Because, if it's unintentional, I would like it to get fixed
(I guess I'll have to take a look at the code if nobody answers me).
I don't see any benefit in loosing type info because variable alias
don't match.
Regards,
Rikard