Hi! > Thanks for looking at this. This query seems to be the same as the > first query in my initial report (with a different targetlist) and has > already been covered in the test cases of v1 patch.
Sorry for the confusion. Yes, it's the same query as yours. I just wanted to note that without asserts it silently returns wrong results (1 row instead of 4) rather than raising an error, in case that's useful for the back-patch decision. Regards, Tatsuya Kawata
