> I could tolerate telling people to use OFFSET 0 (and documenting it!)
> as a workaround if we can't get something more friendly in.

I agree with that. 

> If we go with WITH INLINE then we're likely not solving anything, because
> most people will simply use WITH just like now, and will be subject to the
> fencing without realizing it.

I agree - the default behaviour should be change to match what everybody
expects. The current behaviour should be the exception. 

> Yes, and we're missing the opportunity to confirm with what other
> systems do, and the spirit of the SQL language's declare what I want,
> not how to do it, model.

Essentially *all* other systems optimize CTEs the same way they optimize
derived tables. I think even MySQL does it like that in the upcoming 8.0

I have never heard anyone saying that the Postgres implementation is an
advantage and that they would hate to see this disappear. I usually hear
"Why is Postgres doing that? Can't they change that?" 

Maybe I have a limited view on this, but from where I stand, simply changing
it would help everybody I know and would not break anything. I don't even
think a replacement for the old behaviour would be necessary.

View this message in context: 
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Reply via email to