Thanks Tom,
You were correct, as always. The query was wrong.
I apologize for wasting your time. I needed to
encase the chained OR clauses in parens...I'll try
and purge that Slip.
Sorry,
Mike Mascari
mascarim@yahoo.com
--- Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Mike Mascari <mascarim@yahoo.com> writes:
> > ... However, if an OR clause is introduced as
> below:
> I think the problem is that the OR appears at top
> level in the WHERE
> clause (assuming the above is a verbatim transcript
> of your query).
> OR groups less tightly than AND, so what this really
> means is
> (other-conditions AND (LIKEs-for-SEQ)) OR
> (LIKEs-for-SCD)
> which is undoubtedly not what you had in mind, and
> will certainly
> produce a lot of unwanted records if the query
> manages to complete.
> Every supplies tuple matching SCD will appear joined
> to every possible
> combination of records from the other tables...In
the
> mistaken version, they get evaluated for every
> possible combination
> of joined tuples...
>
> regards, tom lane
>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
