From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add IS (NOT) DISTINCT to subquery_Op |
Date: | 2015-12-12 00:16:43 |
Message-ID: | 566B676B.70602@BlueTreble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/10/15 7:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> writes:
>> Is there any reason we couldn't/shouldn't support IS DISTINCT in
>> subquery_Op? (Or really, just add support to ANY()/ALL()/(SELECT ...)?)
>
> It's not an operator (in the sense of something with a pg_operator OID),
> which means this would be quite a bit less than trivial as far as internal
> representation/implementation goes. I'm not sure if there would be
> grammar issues, either.
make_distinct_op() simply calls make_op() and then changes the tag of
the result node to T_DistinctExpr. So I was hoping something similar
could be done for ANY/ALL?
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-12-12 00:25:29 | Re: Fwd: [GENERAL] pgxs/config/missing is... missing |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-12-12 00:11:05 | Re: pgsql: pg_rewind: Don't error if the two clusters are already on the sa |