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: