Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A77C213364DE for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 04:43:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94064-09 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 07:43:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E93631335ED4 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 04:43:43 -0300 (ADT) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oxb2I-0006jO-0n for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:43:38 +0200 Received: from 178-83-162-123.dclient.hispeed.ch ([178.83.162.123]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:43:38 +0200 Received: from roederja by 178-83-162-123.dclient.hispeed.ch with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:43:38 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org From: =?UTF-8?B?SmFubiBSw7ZkZXI=?= Subject: Re: Table returning functions Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:43:26 +0200 Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <13671.1284940738@sss.pgh.pa.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 178-83-162-123.dclient.hispeed.ch User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; de; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 In-Reply-To: <13671.1284940738@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201009/53 X-Sequence-Number: 34584 True, but it still allowed me to write queries that I do not know how to express otherwise. Am 20.09.10 01:58, schrieb Tom Lane: > =?UTF-8?B?SmFubiBSw7ZkZXI=?= writes: >> Ok I now know that it really seems to do what I expected. But I still >> wonder what it does if I use two functions f() and g() that return a >> different number of rows. > > You get the least common multiple of their periods. It's ugly, and the > lack of any very sane way to define the behavior is the main argument > for deprecating SRFs in the targetlist. > > regards, tom lane >