Re: AW: [HACKERS] having and union in v7beta
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: AW: [HACKERS] having and union in v7beta |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.02A.10003021718390.27493-100000@Dront.DoCS.UU.SE обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | AW: [HACKERS] having and union in v7beta (Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote: > But if the two queries are the same, the union CAN be simplified, > since the union of two identical masses (I don't know the correct word here) > is still that one mass. "set" :) > > Thus 6.5 simplification is correct in this particular case. The issue here seems to be that the queries could have side-effects, such as select nextval('sequence1') union select nextval('sequence1') which should arguably return two distinct rows. I gotta reread SQL's opinion on this, but I'm sure Tom has already done that. From a mathematical point of view, I believe your assumption "lexically equal queries yield mathematically equal sets" is wrong. -- Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115 peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: