| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW |
| Date: | 1998-02-17 08:52:50 |
| Message-ID: | 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C6010A51DB@sdexcsrv1.sd.spardat.at |
| 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 ?"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ | 1998-02-17 09:34:37 | Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW |
| Previous Message | Vadim B. Mikheev | 1998-02-17 07:57:17 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] General Bug Report: palloc fails with lots of ANDs and ORs |