Re: [HACKERS] what standard say ...

From: "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su>
To: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] what standard say ...
Date: 1998-02-06 07:48:58
Message-ID: 34DAC06A.C8E9729@sable.krasnoyarsk.su
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
>
> > 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...
>
> >From "The SQL Standard", 3rd ed., Date and Darwen:
>
> "... each unqualified column name is _implicitly_ qualified by a range variable name
> defined (explicitly or implicitly) in the nearest applicable FROM clause." (the emphasis
> is from the book, not me)
>
> It goes on to recommend reading the standard for full understanding, but it is pretty
> clear that your interpretation is correct; in the example above x is implicitly equivalent
> to t1.x.

Ok. Nice to know that we are correct here :)

Vadim

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zeugswetter Andreas DBT 1998-02-06 07:52:17 AW: [HACKERS] Re: atttypmod of 0
Previous Message Julia Anne Case 1998-02-06 07:27:46 [BUG?] Frontend Protocol...