From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | berend(at)pobox(dot)com |
Subject: | RE: What database i can use? (fwd) |
Date: | 1999-12-28 02:14:08 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.21.9912272113430.50426-100000@hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
For those working on INNER/OUTER Joins...any comments? :)
Marc G. Fournier scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
scrappy(at){postgresql|isc}.org ICQ#7615664
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 10:36:52 +0100
From: Berend de Boer <berend(at)pobox(dot)com>
To: 'Marc G. Fournier' <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: freebsd-database(at)FreeBSD(dot)ORG
Subject: RE: What database i can use?
> JOIN statement? I take it that this is different then:
>
> SELECT a.field1, b.field2 from table1 a, table2 b where a.key = b.key
ANSI92 supports the far better readable JOIN statement:
select a.field1, b.field2
from table1 a
join table2 b on
a.key = b.key
Left outer joins are now easy to:
select a.field1, b.field2
from table1 a
left outer join table2 b on
a.key = b.key
It generally parses and optimizes faster too. For MS SQL Server I've seen
improvements of up to 75% percent: execution time was the same, but the plan
was calculated much faster.
Groetjes,
Berend. (-:
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 1999-12-28 02:35:32 | Re: [HACKERS] ecpg enhance patch |
Previous Message | Aaron J. Seigo | 1999-12-27 18:23:19 | Re: [HACKERS] database replication |