| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | CSN <cool_screen_name90001(at)yahoo(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Derived tables? | 
| Date: | 2004-10-28 22:39:39 | 
| Message-ID: | 7905.1099003179@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
CSN <cool_screen_name90001(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> Just wondering - does PG support derived tables? I'm
> not really sure what the difference is between them
> and subqueries.
None whatever, at least using the definition offered by your second 
reference:
	A derived table is a select statement inside parenthesis, with
	an alias, used as a table in a join.
The SQL92 spec appears to use the phrase in exactly this way (except
they don't require the construct to appear in a join, as indeed we don't
either; the most correct explanation would probably be "used as a table
in a FROM clause").
MySQL often has their own spin on such terms ;-).  I'm not sure what
MySQL 4.1 actually supports in this line.  But I'll make a side bet that
they don't yet optimize them as well as we do ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2004-10-28 22:47:10 | Re: Reasoning behind process instead of thread based | 
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2004-10-28 22:37:29 | Turning a subselect into an array |