| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | José Soares <jose(at)sferacarta(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] SELECT BUG |
| Date: | 1999-09-07 13:35:26 |
| Message-ID: | 27299.936711326@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9?= Soares <jose(at)sferacarta(dot)com> writes:
> Yes, Tom, now it works, but...
> Informix gives me a different result. Who is right ?
Hard to tell, since I don't know what your data is.
> prova=> update pg_operator set oprcanhash = 'f' where oid = 1054;
> UPDATE 1
> prova=> select mcode, dcode from master m, detail d where mcode=dcode;
> mcode |dcode
> -----------+----------------
> a1 |a1
> a13 |a13
> a13 |a13
> (3 rows)
... but all three of those sure look equal to me ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-09-07 13:53:54 | Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside transaction block |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-09-07 13:18:02 | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 6.5.1: libpq++ libraries on IRIX 6.5 |