Re: RangeTblEntry.inh vs. RTE_SUBQUERY

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: RangeTblEntry.inh vs. RTE_SUBQUERY
Дата
Msg-id 814829.1708701565@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: RangeTblEntry.inh vs. RTE_SUBQUERY  (Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: RangeTblEntry.inh vs. RTE_SUBQUERY  (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 14:35, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
>> Various code comments say that the RangeTblEntry field inh may only be
>> set for entries of kind RTE_RELATION.

> Yes, it's explained a bit more clearly/accurately in expand_inherited_rtentry():

>  * "inh" is only allowed in two cases: RELATION and SUBQUERY RTEs.

Yes.  The latter has been accurate for a very long time, so I'm
surprised that there are any places that think otherwise.  We need
to fix them --- where did you see this exactly?

(Note that RELATION-only is accurate within the parser and rewriter,
so maybe clarifications about context are in order.)

            regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: incremental backup mishandles XLOG_DBASE_CREATE_FILE_COPY
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query