Re: Odd/undocumented precedence of concatenation operator

From: Shay Rojansky <roji(at)roji(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Odd/undocumented precedence of concatenation operator
Date: 2015-09-09 08:09:26
Message-ID: CADT4RqCan+5ngig_uZ12SYONNmA-tcRVid8ck5WnOMcUF6wApw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> It is expected, and documented. (It's also different in 9.5, see
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=c6b3c939b7e0f1d35f4ed4996e71420a993810d2
> )
>

Ah, thanks!

> > If nothing else, it seems that the concatenation operator should be
> listed
> > on the operator precedence table at
> >
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/sql-syntax-lexical.html#SQL-PRECEDENCE-TABLE
>
> Both >= and || fall into the "any other operator" case, no?
>

I somehow missed that in the table, assuming that >= would be somewhere
with > and =. Thanks again.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shulgin, Oleksandr 2015-09-09 08:22:02 Re: On-demand running query plans using auto_explain and signals
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2015-09-09 07:52:40 Re: proposal: function parse_ident