Re: Understanding behavior of SELECT with multiple unnested columns
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Understanding behavior of SELECT with multiple unnested columns |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10348.1364392992@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Understanding behavior of SELECT with multiple unnested columns (Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Understanding behavior of SELECT with multiple unnested columns
Re: Understanding behavior of SELECT with multiple unnested columns Re: Understanding behavior of SELECT with multiple unnested columns |
Список | pgsql-general |
Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz> writes: > The rule appears to be, > where N_x & N_y are the number of entries returned for x & y: > N_result = is the smallest positive integer that has N_x & N_y as factors. Right: if there are multiple set-returning functions in a SELECT list, the number of rows you get is the least common multiple of their periods. (See the logic in ExecTargetList that cycles the SRFs until they all report "done" at the same time.) I guess there's some value in this for the case where they all have the same period, but otherwise it's kind of bizarre. It's been like that since Berkeley days though, so I doubt we'll consider changing it now. Rather, it'll just be quietly deprecated in favor of putting SRFs into FROM (with LATERAL where needed). regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: