Re: unnesesary sorting after Merge Full Join - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: unnesesary sorting after Merge Full Join
Date
Msg-id 1204040950.4252.350.camel@ebony.site
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: unnesesary sorting after Merge Full Join  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: unnesesary sorting after Merge Full Join
List pgsql-general
On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 10:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > and add COALESCE(id2,id1) to it as well I think.
>
> No, because those two expressions are not equivalent.  (Hmm ... squint
> ... but full merge join is pretty much symmetric, so it's not clear
> why it should matter which side is left or right.  Maybe COALESCE
> isn't
> exactly the right concept with which to describe the merged variable?)

It is, in this case only, since when id2 is not null id2 == id1.

So in this case its OK to express a symmetric relationship as a left
handed function.

--
  Simon Riggs
  2ndQuadrant  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: unnesesary sorting after Merge Full Join
Next
From: Maciej Sieczka
Date:
Subject: Re: how to auto GRANT custom ACL on a new table?