From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Rules and Views |
Date: | 2002-08-01 17:19:07 |
Message-ID: | 20020801100955.K29686-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> > If we assume two collations one case sensitive one not with the
> > except in the non-sensitive and the where in the sensitive and
> > a left with 'A' and right with 'a', it'd be incorrect to push a
> > case sensitive where foo='A' down to the right since that'd change the
> > output from zero rows to one.
>
> You missed my point. Per spec, either zero or one rows out of the whole
> thing is okay, because either the 'A' or the 'a' row might be returned
> as the representative row for the group by the EXCEPT. Yes, the
> behavior may change, but it's still within spec.
Except can't return 'A' or 'a', there is no representative row because
n>0. That's the difference with UNION and INTERSECT.
"If EXCEPT is specified, then
Case:
A) If m>0 and n=0, then T contains exactly one duplicate of R.
B) Otherwise, T contains no duplicate of R."
So if T1 has a #dups>0 and T2 has a #dups>0 we should get
no rows, but what if T1' (with the clause) has a #dups>0 but
T2' has a #dups=0?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-08-01 17:21:34 | Re: Trimming the Fat: Getting code via CVSup ... |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-08-01 17:00:50 | Re: Trimming the Fat: Getting code via CVSup ... |