Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > test=> SELECT pg_class.* LIMIT 0; > > NOTICE: adding missing FROM-clause entry for table "pg_class" > > > Is this what we want? I don't think so. I thought we wanted to > > maintain the backward-compatible syntax of no FROM clause. > > Well, the discussion earlier in the week concluded that > add_missing_from=true should emit a notice in every case where > add_missing_from=false would fail. Do you want to argue against > that conclusion?
I didn't realize that "SELECT pg_class.*" was now going to fail because add_missing_from is false. I didn't link those two together in my head, probably because the warning is not emitted if there is no FROM clause. Anyway, I am fine either way but wanted to publicise it at least. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
