Re: Join condition parsing puzzle
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Join condition parsing puzzle |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 12727.1535061063@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Join condition parsing puzzle (Mark Jeffcoat <jeffcoat@alumni.rice.edu>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Join condition parsing puzzle
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
Mark Jeffcoat <jeffcoat@alumni.rice.edu> writes:
> SELECT *
> FROM relation_a
> LEFT JOIN relation_b
> JOIN relation_c
> ON (relation_c.id_p = relation_b.id_p)
> ON (relation_a.id_c = relation_b.id_c AND relation_a.id_v = relation_b.id_v);
> I would have claimed before seeing this example that it wasn't even
> grammatical; I thought the only legal place to write the ON clause was
> immediately after the JOIN. Apparently not.
> How should I read this query? I'd appreciate any help understanding this.
You read it as
SELECT *
FROM
relation_a
LEFT JOIN (relation_b
JOIN relation_c
ON (relation_c.id_p = relation_b.id_p))
ON (relation_a.id_c = relation_b.id_c AND relation_a.id_v = relation_b.id_v);
There's no other valid way to parenthesize it, so that's what
the parser does.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: