Re: Cartesian product bug?

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Cartesian product bug?
Date: 2003-11-03 20:21:58
Message-ID: 87oevt6w49.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:

> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > (Personally I think NATURAL JOIN is an evil, bug-prone construct,
> > precisely because coincidental matches of column names will mess up your
> > results.)
>
> Me too. When I first saw it, I figured it would "naturally join" the two
> tables on their fk/pk relation if there was one. That seems natural.
> Joining on two fields that just happen to have the same name is unnatural
> to me.

Well 99% of the time I impose on myself a constraint to only use the same name
iff they refer to the same attribute. So if they have the same name then they
really ought to be a reasonable join clause.

However the 1% are things like "date_created, date_updated" or even flags like
"active", "deleted" etc. Which are more than enough to make it utterly
useless.

Too bad really, it would be a handy thing for ad-hoc queries typed at psql. It
would still seem too fragile for production queries though.

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martin Marques 2003-11-03 20:26:40 Re: Constraint Problem
Previous Message Greg Stark 2003-11-03 20:12:04 Re: Constraint Problem