From: | Michael Hirohama <kamesan(at)ricochet(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su> |
Cc: | hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Subselects open issue Nr. NEW |
Date: | 1998-02-17 04:14:40 |
Message-ID: | l03110740b10ebbe12b36@[204.179.134.140] |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At 10:31 +0700 2/17/98, Vadim B. Mikheev wrote:
[...]
>
>I understand this. And this is how it works currently:
>
>select * from tab where (A,B) >= ANY (select X, Y from tab2);
>
>means: select tuples where A >= X _and_ B >= Y for some tuple from tab2.
> ^^^^^
> 'AND' is used for all Op-s except for '<>' when 'OR' is used.
>
>Question is "should we drop this feature (?) or leave it as is ?"
>
>Comments ?
>
>Vadim
I recommend dropping this feature and only supporing =ANY and <>ANY.
Supporing the relational operators cannot be optimized in the general case.
If I needed to perform the <=ANY query efficiently, I might use a
functional index on 'A' and 'B' using an R-tree method.
Regards,
--
Michael Hirohama <kamesan(at)ricochet(dot)net>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | ocie | 1998-02-17 04:21:25 | Re: DB logging (was: Problem with the numbers I reported yesterday) |
Previous Message | The Hermit Hacker | 1998-02-17 03:42:37 | Re: [QUESTIONS] Trouble creating view\ |