| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design |
| Date: | 2017-03-10 12:49:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRBkigjdohBbCiTsw4qNqdRMa-ko1j=d6wH_mCtJ2hQd8w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
2017-03-10 12:55 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>
> 2017-03-10 10:13 GMT+01:00 Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>> Yes, you are correct it should to work on CORRESPONDING clause case. SQL
>> 20nn standard draft only said each query to be of the same degree in a case
>> of set operation without corresponding clause. The attached patch is
>> corrected as such .I add those new test case to regression test too
>>
>
> Thank you - I will recheck it.
>
Fast check - it looks well
Regards
Pavel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-10 12:51:15 | Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes |
| Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2017-03-10 12:16:58 | Re: Declarative partitioning optimization for large amount of partitions |