Re: [HACKERS] Subselects and NOTs

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su>
Cc: Mattias Kregert <matti(at)algonet(dot)se>, ocie(at)paracel(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Subselects and NOTs
Date: 1998-02-24 02:16:00
Message-ID: 34F22D60.E1F685E0@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> This is exactly how Postgres works now and differ from 3 "big boys".
> If there are no objections then I'll leave this as is. We can return
> to this issue latter.

I interprete SQL92 the same way. Let's leave as-is indefinitely/forever...

- Tom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vadim B. Mikheev 1998-02-24 02:29:25 Re: [HACKERS] Views on aggregates - need assistence
Previous Message Vadim B. Mikheev 1998-02-24 01:30:27 Re: [HACKERS] Subselects and NOTs