Re: Questions regarding distinct operation implementation

From: Ankit Kumar Pandey <itsankitkp(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, pghackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Questions regarding distinct operation implementation
Date: 2022-12-04 17:09:05
Message-ID: b4251b47-d20a-d437-71ba-1321c559fdee@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 04/12/22 22:25, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 12/4/22 14:34, Ankit Kumar Pandey wrote:
>
>> This looks like way to go that would ensure main use case of
>> portability from Oracle.
>
> The goal should not be portability from Oracle, but adherence to the
> standard.
Yes, Vik. You are right. Wrong remark from my side.

--
Regards,
Ankit Kumar Pandey

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2022-12-04 17:32:07 Re: Generate pg_stat_get_* functions with Macros
Previous Message Vik Fearing 2022-12-04 17:01:33 Re: Error-safe user functions