Re: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at (Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ)
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW
Date: 1998-02-17 16:02:49
Message-ID: 199802171602.LAA25539@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> Gosh, please leave it in it is superb, great, fantastic ...
> If somebody defines a different behavior as standard in the future,
> we will need to tell him that he has a gordian knot in his brains :-)
>
> Andreas
>
> > I understand this. And this is how it works currently:
> >
> > select * from tab where (A,B) >= ANY (select X, Y from tab2);
> >
> > means: select tuples where A >= X _and_ B >= Y for some tuple from tab2.
> > ^^^^^
> > 'AND' is used for all Op-s except for '<>' when 'OR' is used.
> >
> > Question is "should we drop this feature (?) or leave it as is ?"
>
>
>

I think my recent posting answers this. You have to comare from
left-to-right until you find an answer.

--
Bruce Momjian
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ 1998-02-17 16:34:19 AW: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-02-17 15:59:32 Re: [HACKERS] Subselects and NOTs