Julien Rouhaud <rjuju...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Thomas Munro > <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> I suppose we could consider moving the schemaname check into >> getRTEForSpecialRelationType(), since otherwise both callers need to >> do that (and as you discovered, one forgot).
> Thanks for the feedback. That was my first idea, but I assumed there > could be future use for this function on qualified RangeVar if it > wasn't done this way. > I agree it'd be much safer, so v2 attached, check moved in > getRTEForSpecialRelationType(). Hm. I actually think the bug here is that 18ce3a4ab introduced anything into setTargetTable at all. There was never previously any assumption that the target could be anything but a regular table, so we just ignored CTEs there, and I do not think the new behavior is an improvement. So my proposal is to rip out the getRTEForSpecialRelationTypes check there. I tend to agree that getRTEForSpecialRelationTypes should probably contain an explicit check for unqualified name rather than relying on its caller ... but that's a matter of future-proofing not a bug fix. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers