| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Warts with SELECT DISTINCT |
| Date: | 2006-05-04 17:18:30 |
| Message-ID: | 11287.1146763110@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Hm. This goes back to the earlier conversation about whether = should ever be
> true for two objects that aren't, well, equal. I thought there was some
> consensus at the time that sorting should impose a superficial ordering on
> items that compare equal but aren't in fact the same.
We forced that recently for text strings (overriding locale-specific
cases in strcoll()), but there certainly was not any intent to decree
that every datatype must do likewise.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-04 17:20:32 | Re: patch review, please: Autovacuum/Vacuum times via stats. |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-05-04 17:17:53 | Re: Typo in ginxlog.c |