Re: BUG #6626: union all with values of type "unknown"
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #6626: union all with values of type "unknown" |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 7003.1337716549@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #6626: union all with values of type "unknown" (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #6626: union all with values of type "unknown"
|
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> deik3qfhu265n6=> with hello as (select 'hello' as name)
>> deik3qfhu265n6-> , bye as (select 'bye' as name)
>> deik3qfhu265n6-> select * from hello UNION ALL select * from bye;
>> ERROR: failed to find conversion function from unknown to text
> I think it should return a column of type text, just as if you'd done this:
> select v from (select 'hello' union all select 'bye') x(v);
I don't think it's a great idea to make CTEs handle this differently
from other places where the same issue arises (from memory, views and
INSERT/SELECT have problems with unknown literals, and there are
probably other places I'm forgetting).
Should we institute a uniform policy of forcing unknown sub-select
outputs to text type? This would almost certainly break a few peoples'
queries, but the reduction of surprise might be worth it for most.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: