AW: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW

I allready took my statement back, about an hour after I said this.
But yes, I agree that the left-right approach would be intuitive (same as
compound index).
In mathematics it is called lexical order, I only thought this would be hard
to implement.
Also there are a lot of operators (all negated Op's that) will want an _OR_
e.g. !=~, not only <>

So all not very easy, I'll try to think some more about it.
Andreas
> ----------
> Von: Bruce Momjian[SMTP:maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Februar 1998 17:15
> An: Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org
> Betreff: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW
>
> >
> > Gosh, please leave it in it is superb, great, fantastic ...
> > If somebody defines a different behavior as standard in the future,
> > we will need to tell him that he has a gordian knot in his brains :-)
> >
> > Andreas
> >
> > > I understand this. And this is how it works currently:
> > >
> > > select * from tab where (A,B) >= ANY (select X, Y from tab2);
> > >
> > > means: select tuples where A >= X _and_ B >= Y for some tuple from
> tab2.
> > > ^^^^^
> > > 'AND' is used for all Op-s except for '<>' when 'OR' is used.
> > >
> > > Question is "should we drop this feature (?) or leave it as is ?"
> >
> >
> >
>
> I think my recent posting answers this. You have to comare from
> left-to-right until you find an answer.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian
> maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us
>
>