| From: | Darin Ohashi <DOhashi(at)maplesoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Fernando Nasser'" <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com>, Felipe Schnack <felipes(at)ritterdosreis(dot)br> |
| Cc: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: the IN clause saga |
| Date: | 2003-07-22 14:51:38 |
| Message-ID: | F17255C2B596D3119A5600508B44FA68052EB878@courier.maplesoft.on.ca |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
> Oliver has to update his summary first. There are some new info from
> the backend side.
>
> Note that option 2 now should read "when inside the parenthesis that
> define an <in value list> of the IN <predicate>. (I am using the SQL
> standard clause names here).
>
> I would go with number 2 because that is exactly what the
> backend does
> in its PREPARE statement.
I'm not sure if this makes sense, but could you have a conflict between a set
containing a single element that is the array and a set containing the elements
of the array.
Darin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-07-22 14:51:51 | Re: the IN clause saga |
| Previous Message | Oliver Jowett | 2003-07-22 14:50:40 | Re: patch: tiny patch to correct stringbuffer size estimate |