| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Randal L(dot) Schwartz" <merlyn(at)stonehenge(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: fairly current mysql v postgresql comparison need for |
| Date: | 2003-03-24 15:38:10 |
| Message-ID: | 12928.1048520290@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> writes:
> *They apparently added subselects as of Jan of this year in FROM
> and WHERE clauses. Docs don't mention target lists, they might
> have implemented subselects in target lists though.
It would be worth asking some hard questions about how good their
subselect implementation is, too. "We've got subselects!" doesn't
mean that they can optimize 'em with any efficiency. Our subselect
implementation has gotten a lot better over the years than it started
out as; I'd imagine MySQL is just starting to climb that same learning
curve ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2003-03-24 16:17:01 | Re: GiST: Need ideas on how to minimise data in a GiST index |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-03-24 15:34:17 | Re: GiST: Need ideas on how to minimise data in a GiST index |