| From: | "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at>, "'Bruce Momjian'" <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: AW: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW |
| Date: | 1998-02-17 16:48:27 |
| Message-ID: | 34E9BF5B.8BE2C948@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> 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 <>
We had started discussing this back when we implemented the general SQL92
syntax for multiple left-hand arguments in expressions.
One possibility was to make the generalization that any operator with "!" or
"<>" (others too?) in the operator string would be handled as a negation, and
all others otherwise. Then, many operators would "magically" work correctly or
intuitively, while a few, perhaps, would not behave correctly. However, imho
this is preferable to not allowing _any_ of these, and perhaps we would learn
over the next few months a way to tighten it up...
- Tom
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aleksandr A. Belinsky | 1998-02-17 18:31:03 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] agregate function sum error |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ | 1998-02-17 16:34:19 | AW: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW |