"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> For the VALUES case, the suggestion of "row" and "column" terminology
> seems the right thing, but for UNION it would be better to use "branch"
> perhaps ("row" certainly seems misleading). How can we make that work
> without indulging in untranslatable keyword-insertion?
Hm, I guess the SQL spec terminology in both cases would be "table
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Koichi Suzuki||Date: 2007-04-24 01:15:15|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Full page writes improvement, code update|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2007-04-24 00:09:27|
|Subject: Re: Fragmentation project|