From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Idea on how to simplify comparing two sets |
Date: | 2017-02-07 18:03:14 |
Message-ID: | 6491.1486490594@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com> writes:
>>> Currently there is no simple way to check if two sets are equal.
>> Uh ... maybe check whether SELECT set1 EXCEPT SELECT set2
>> and SELECT set2 EXCEPT SELECT set1 are both empty?
> SELECT set1 FULL EXCEPT SELECT set2 ?
> Matches with the concept and syntax of "FULL JOIN".
Actually ... now that you mention full join, I believe this works:
select * from (select ...) s1 full join (select ...) s2
on ((s1.*)=(s2.*)) where s1.* is distinct from s2.*;
> That said I'm not sure how much we want to go down this road on our own.
> It'd be nice to have when its needed but its not something that gets much
> visibility on these lists to suggest a large pent-up demand.
Yeah, if this isn't in the standard and not in other databases either,
that would seem to suggest that it's not a big requirement.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-02-07 18:48:30 | Re: Idea on how to simplify comparing two sets |
Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2017-02-07 18:00:50 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Release note updates. |