On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 01:39:27AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote: > >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > > >> I'm +1 for backpatching it. It may be operating as designed by > >> PeterE ten years ago, but it's not operating as designed by the SQL > >> standard. > > Tom> By that argument, *anyplace* where we're missing a SQL-spec > Tom> feature is a back-patchable bug. I don't buy it. > > But this is a feature we already claimed to actually support (it's > listed in sql_features with a bunch of unqualified YES entries), but in > fact doesn't work properly.
This looks like a bug fix to me, for what it's worth. Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
