Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT
Date: 2000-10-16 03:59:16
Message-ID: 21599.971668756@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> I think it's time to bite the bullet and put in a lookahead filter.
>> What say you?

> Hmmm. Not real excited about that for performance reasons. Other options?

It's been in there for a month. I'll bet lunch you will be unable to
measure any performance cost --- one extra function call and if-test
per token lexed is just not going to show on the radar screen.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-10-16 04:12:58 Re: Performance on inserts
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-10-16 03:51:57 Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT