Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikk...@cs.helsinki.fi> writes: > On 2011-02-26 2:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I've gone ahead and applied the code portion of the patch, with >> modifications as per discussion, and other editorialization.
> Thanks a lot! > One thing bothers me though: what was the reason for requiring a > RETURNING clause for data-modifying statements in WITH? That test was in your patch, no? I moved the code to another place but it's still enforcing the same thing, namely that you can't reference the output of an INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE that hasn't got RETURNING. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers