Re: [HACKERS] generate_series regression 9.6->10

2017-05-24 Thread Paul Ramsey
Thanks Tom. This showed up in a regression test of ours that built the test data using generate_series, so it's not a critical production issue or anything, just a surprise change in behaviour. P. On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Paul Ramsey writes: > > The behaviour of gene

Re: [HACKERS] generate_series regression 9.6->10

2017-05-24 Thread Tom Lane
Paul Ramsey writes: > The behaviour of generate_series seems to have changed a little, at least > in conjunction w/ CTEs. What's changed is the behavior of multiple SRFs in a SELECT's targetlist, cf https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=69f4b9c85f168ae006929eec44fc44

Re: [HACKERS] generate_series regression 9.6->10

2017-05-24 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-05-24 10:09:19 -0700, Paul Ramsey wrote: > The behaviour of generate_series seems to have changed a little, at least > in conjunction w/ CTEs. Under 9.6 (and prior) this query returns 2127 rows, > with no nulls: > > with > ij as ( select i, j from generate_series(1, 10) i, generate_series(