| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Negators for operators |
| Date: | 2016-06-03 19:17:45 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZdEFSc75LkhT297s+oARqdPdVBNTZ3PB2wEQrrX8-hNQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 3:02 PM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> While constructing a somewhat hairy query with HAVING in it, I noticed
> that a lot of operators don't have negators, which would have been
> convenient for the class of queries I was constructing. Further
> investigation showed that while 380 of the built-in operators had
> negators, 395 do not.
>
> For some fraction I'll investigate if warranted, a negator makes no
> sense. For the rest, I'd like to propose adding negator operators
> prefixed with '!', just as we have for the negators of regex-like
> things.
>
> What say?
How about using NOT?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-06-03 19:38:07 | Re: Negators for operators |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-06-03 19:17:06 | Re: Perf Benchmarking and regression. |