Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Optimization rules for semi and anti joins - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Optimization rules for semi and anti joins
Date
Msg-id 28499.1234316505@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Optimization rules for semi and anti joins  ("Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Optimization rules for semi and anti joins  ("Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
"Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com> writes:
> Cripes!  I just had an idea and it looks like the buggers beat me to it :(
> http://www.google.com/patents?id=4bqBAAAAEBAJ&dq=null+aware+anti-join

I wonder if the USPTO is really clueless enough to accept this?
Claim 1 would give Oracle ownership of the definition of NOT IN,
and few of the other claims seem exactly non-obvious either.
        regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jonah H. Harris"
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimization rules for semi and anti joins
Next
From: "Jonah H. Harris"
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimization rules for semi and anti joins