Re: [HACKERS] subselects

From: darrenk(at)insightdist(dot)com (Darren King)
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] subselects
Date: 1998-01-21 14:13:05
Message-ID: 9801211413.AA36452@ceodev
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> We are only going to have subselects in the WHERE clause, not in the
> target list, right?
>
> The standard says we can have them either place, but I didn't think we
> were implementing the target list subselects.
>
> Is that correct?

What about the HAVING clause? Currently not in, but someone here wants
to take a stab at it.

Doesn't seem that tough...loops over the tuples returned from the group
by node and checks the expression such as "x > 5" or "x = (subselect)".

The cost analysis in the optimizer could be tricky come to think of it.
If a subselect has a HAVING, would have to have a formula to determine
the selectiveness. Hmmm...

darrenk

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Serj 1998-01-21 14:56:50 group by bug in 6.2.1 & 6.3 -snapshot
Previous Message Karl Denninger 1998-01-21 13:53:02 Re: [QUESTIONS] Re: locking