Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On 4/21/22 21:03, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think we should just drop this cross-check altogether; it is not nearly
>> useful enough to justify the work that'd be involved in maintaining
>> cterefcount accurately for all such transformations. All it's really
>> there for is to be sure that we don't need to make a subplan for the
>> inlined CTE.
> WFM. I'm not particularly attached to the assert, so if you say it's not
> worth it let's get rid of it.
Done.
regards, tom lane
