On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > But I see very > little case for allowing CTEs to capture such references, because surely > we are never going to allow that to do anything useful, and we have > several years of precedent now that they don't capture.
For what it's worth, SQL Server allows DML in CTEs like us but went the other way on this. Not only are its CTEs in scope as DML targets, it actually lets you update them in cases where a view would be updatable, rewriting as base table updates. I'm not suggesting that we should do that too (unless of course it shows up in a future standard), just pointing it out as a curiosity. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
