On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:27:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > And I will say once more that a patch that affects only the behavior of
> > eval_const_expressions can be rejected on its face. That code has to be
> > kept in sync with the behavior of execQual.c, not just whacked around by
> > itself. And then there are the NOT NULL constraint cases to worry about.
>
> Hmm ... actually, it's already not in sync, because:
>
> regression=# create table tt (x int);
> CREATE TABLE
> regression=# insert into tt values(null);
> INSERT 0 1
> regression=# select row(x) from tt;
> row
> -----
> ()
> (1 row)
>
> regression=# select row(row(x)) from tt;
> row
> --------
> ("()")
> (1 row)
>
> regression=# select row(row(row(x))) from tt;
> row
> --------------
> ("(""()"")")
> (1 row)
Uh, I see the same output you show for a NULL constant:
SELECT ROW(NULL);
row
-----
()
SELECT ROW(ROW(NULL));
row
--------
("()")
SELECT ROW(ROW(ROW(NULL)));
row
--------------
("(""()"")")
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
