| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT |
| Date: | 2000-10-16 03:51:57 |
| Message-ID: | 200010160351.XAA29476@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> You'll probably recall that the ambiguity between NOT NULL and NOT
> DEFERRABLE gave us similar problems. We were able to get around that
> by pretending NOT DEFERRABLE is an independent clause and leaving some
> of the parsing work to be done by analyze.c, but I don't think that
> trick will work here.
>
> I seem to recall a third case where a lookahead would have helped,
> but can't find the details in the archives right now.
>
> I think it's time to bite the bullet and put in a lookahead filter.
> What say you?
Hmmm. Not real excited about that for performance reasons. Other options?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-10-16 03:59:16 | Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT |
| Previous Message | Philip Warner - CVS | 2000-10-16 03:34:47 | pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref (allfiles.sgml) |