> --- david.g.johnston@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 2:45 PM, <kbrannen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I can go with that now that I understand it (and I did not read the docs > > that way), but I guess I was expecting it to see that "upper(name)" isn't > > there, so it should pull that expression apart, find "name" and see that in > > the output list before it starts searching the input list. After all, > > that's what happens when it wants to search the input list, it's torn the > > expression apart to find a column name. So why did it not look for "name" > > in the output list but was willing to do that for the input list. I guess > > that was really the heart of my question. :) > > > This probably comes up twice a year or so. The depth of detail of the > answer depends on who decided to respond. No ones seem motivated enough > to write a decent FAQ article...and enough people are willing to just > answer to the (public/searchable) > > Here's a decent context response by Tom Lane that I quickly found from a > few years back. > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/12023.1376506569%40sss.pgh.pa.us Thanks David! That explains it even more and how it got this way. I'll see about finding a few spare cycles to create a doc patch based on Tom's answer and maybe it'll get accepted and help others down the road. Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
