Repository navigation
Read a column found in two tables from the first table inside a built-in function, as before #2619 - #2929
Merged
Conversation
…-in function, as before #2619
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adjusts a breaking change we merged by accident in #2619. That PR lets a bare column inside a built-in function (
UPPER,LENGTH,TRIMand the rest) resolve to the table that has it, which fixes #2615. But a column found in both joined tables now throwsCannot resolve column "name" because it exists in two source tables, where 4.22.0 read it from the first table.With this change, such a column reads the first table again inside a built-in function, and a column of one table keeps the fix from #2619. Test F in
test/test2615.jscovers JOIN, LEFT JOIN, a comma join and WHERE. The full suite passes.Rejecting the ambiguous column is the right behaviour in the long run, and #2928 tracks it for the next major version.