Re: [HACKERS] Oops, I seem to have changed UNION's behavior

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Taral
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Oops, I seem to have changed UNION's behavior
Дата
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.10.9905091551330.8677-100000@dragon.taral.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Oops, I seem to have changed UNION's behavior  (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sun, 9 May 1999, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> > > Am I right in thinking that UNION (without ALL) is defined to do a
> > > DISTINCT on its result, so that duplicates are removed even if the
> > > duplicates both came from the same source table?  That's what 6.4.2
> > > does, but I do not know if it's strictly kosher according to the SQL
> > > spec.
> 
> Yes, this is the right behavior according to SQL92...

In which case something should put a DISTINCT on queries using UNION...
since making T_Query nodes never equal is a deoptimization.

Taral



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Taral
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] inet data type regression test fails
Следующее
От: Thomas Lockhart
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] NUMERIC type conversions leave much to be desired