From: | "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su> |
---|---|
To: | hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | what standard say ... |
Date: | 1998-02-06 04:35:05 |
Message-ID: | 34DA92F9.F03D6CB3@sable.krasnoyarsk.su |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
vac=> \d test
Table = test
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+-------+
| Field | Type | Length|
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+-------+
| x | int4 | 4 |
| y | int4 | 4 |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+-------+
vac=> select count(*) from test where exists (select t1.y from test t1 where t1.y = x);
^
Is this correlated subquery or not ?
(Note, that I don't use x with t1. prefix here)
With current parser this works as un-correlated subquery...
Is this Ok and I have to re-write query as
vac=> select count(*) from test t2 where exists
^^
(select t1.y from test t1 where t1.y = t2.x);
^^^
to get correlated one ?
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Billy G. Allie | 1998-02-06 04:47:38 | The new 'isinf.c' function in port. |
Previous Message | Thomas G. Lockhart | 1998-02-06 02:53:37 | Re: [HACKERS] create function bug? |