Re: [HACKERS] distinct. Is this the correct behaviour?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
Cc: sszabo(at)bigpanda(dot)com, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] distinct. Is this the correct behaviour?
Date: 1999-10-21 13:32:53
Message-ID: 16464.940512773@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com> writes:
> Just checked sybase and the original query
> acts identical to ours.

Hmph, so sybase hasn't thought through the implications of ORDER BY on
a hidden column vs. DISTINCT either. Can anyone try it on some other
DBMSes?

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-10-21 13:36:54 Re: [HACKERS] distinct. Is this the correct behaviour?
Previous Message Michael Meskes 1999-10-21 13:16:57 Re: Planning final assault on query length limits