Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Fixing row comparison semantics

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com>
To: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
Cc: pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fixing row comparison semantics
Date: 2005-12-26 19:51:29
Message-ID: BAY20-F8D907221DC981584E2FA7F9340@phx.gbl (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>
>Huh?  The only "current behavior" with other operators is failure:

you didn't understand me. I know so operator <* isn't supported now.
I prefere SQL spec behave too. But what I wont:

a <* b   ~ ai <= bi and one ai < bi => true ; if one ai > bi => NULL; else 
false

but this behave is from some views really chaotic. This comparation is used 
in operation research, but propably is far to ideas ANSI SQL. It was  only 
idea.

>
>regression=# select (1,1) <* (1,2);
>ERROR:  operator <* is not supported for row expressions
>
>In any case, you can get the equivalent of the current behavior by
>writing out
>	1 <* 1 AND 1 <* 2
>so I don't see any strong need to support non-SQL-spec behaviors here.
>
>			regards, tom lane

_________________________________________________________________
Najdete si svou lasku a nove pratele na Match.com. http://www.msn.cz/


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Gregory MaxwellDate: 2005-12-26 20:12:48
Subject: Fixing row comparison semantics
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2005-12-26 19:46:44
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Online backup vs Continuous backup

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group