On 2017-01-18 15:24:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> > Yea, have something lying around.  Let me push it then when I get back from 
> > lunch?
> Sure, no sweat.

Pushed.  Yay!

There's one sgml comment you'd added:
"Furthermore, nested set-returning functions did not work at all."

I'm not quite sure what you're referring to there - it was previously
allowed to have one set argument to an SRF:

postgres[28758][1]=# SELECT generate_series(1,generate_series(1,5));
│ generate_series │
│               1 │
│               1 │
│               2 │
│               1 │
│               2 │
│               3 │

Am I misunderstanding what you meant?  I left it in what I committed,
but we probably should clear up the language there.

Working on rebasing the cleanup patch now.  Interested in reviewing
that?  Otherwise I think I'll just push the rebased version of what I'd
posted before, after making another pass through it.

- Andres

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to