Re: NATURAL JOINs
| От | regme please |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: NATURAL JOINs |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 446c7e870810142317s140eb28cybe0127ae82039511@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: NATURAL JOINs (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: NATURAL JOINs
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
Well, it could make some sense to extend the semantics when you have explicit "REFERENCES" to tables in the JOINs.
Or at least warn or notice the user that the "NATURAL (INNER) JOIN" has actuallt been converted into a CROSS one.
It would not be standard but helpful for developers.
Thanks.
2008/10/13 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
"Richard Broersma" <richard.broersma@gmail.com> writes:The OP's case is actually giving a cartesian product, because the tables
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Reg Me Please <regmeplease@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is there a way to know how a NATURAL JOIN is actually done?
> Here is what the manual says about natural joins:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/queries-table-expressions.html#QUERIES-FROM
> Finally, NATURAL is a shorthand form of USING: it forms a USING list
> consisting of exactly those column names that appear in both input
> tables. As with USING, these columns appear only once in the output
> table.
don't have any column names in common.
You'd think this should be an error, but AFAICS the SQL spec requires it
to behave that way.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: