On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Not unless you have sorted the inputs in some way that has more knowledge
>> than the "equal" operator represents. Otherwise you can have elements drop
>> out that might still be needed to match to a later left-hand element.
>
> Of course. You certainly have to choose a sort order that works. Sorting by
> the start field would be sufficient in this case.
Oh &^%")(!. That algorithm only finds the matches where l1.start >=
l2.start. Yeah, you're quite right.
Matthew
--
And why do I do it that way? Because I wish to remain sane. Um, actually,
maybe I should just say I don't want to be any worse than I already am.
- Computer Science Lecturer
