Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dEGPs-0004kX-4W for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 14:40:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dEGPr-00021u-3z for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 14:40:35 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dEGOK-0007bC-Ih for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 14:39:00 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dEGOI-0004QT-1X for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 26 May 2017 14:38:59 +0000 Received: from pro.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v4QEcugY009679; Fri, 26 May 2017 10:38:56 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: "Regina Obe" cc: "'PostgreSQL-development'" Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 10 changes in exclusion constraints - did something change? CASE WHEN behavior oddity In-reply-to: <000001d2d5de$d8d66170$8a832450$@pcorp.us> References: <000001d2d5de$d8d66170$8a832450$@pcorp.us> Comments: In-reply-to "Regina Obe" message dated "Fri, 26 May 2017 01:13:43 -0400" Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 10:38:54 -0400 Message-ID: <29994.1495809534@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org "Regina Obe" writes: > I figured out the culprit was the change in CASE WHEN behavior with set > returning functions > Had a criteria something of the form: > CASE WHEN some_condition_dependent_on_sometable_that_resolves_to_false THEN > (regexp_matches(...))[1] ELSE ... END > FROM sometable; You might want to consider changing such usages to use regexp_match() instead of regexp_matches(). regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers