| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Functions returning sets |
| Date: | 2001-05-20 17:55:25 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.21.0105201054080.53774-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 19 May 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> > I think what we should probably do is make IN better and use that or then
> > support =ANY(=SOME)/=ALL on such things. I think =ANY would be easy
> > since IN is defined in terms of it in the spec.
>
> And in our code too ;-). ANY/ALL have been there for awhile.
:) Well that makes it easier anyway. I do agree with the point that at
some point IN needs to be smarter. Can the IN always get written as a
join and is it always better to do so?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Don Baccus | 2001-05-20 18:21:44 | Re: Re: External search engine, advice |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2001-05-20 17:53:55 | Re: Functions returning sets |