Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([2a02:16a8:dc51::56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gBNld-0006zA-5X for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 17:31:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gBNlZ-0003ZC-TC for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 17:31:53 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gBNlZ-0003Z2-D7 for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 17:31:53 +0000 Received: from momjian.us ([72.94.173.45]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gBNlW-00065d-FI for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 17:31:51 +0000 Received: from bruce by momjian.us with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gBNlU-0003NB-4X; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 13:31:48 -0400 Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 13:31:48 -0400 From: Bruce Momjian To: KES Cc: "David G. Johnston" , "pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Ambiguous usage of 'any' in explanation Message-ID: <20181013173148.GA25417@momjian.us> References: <153701242703.22334.1476830122267077397@wrigleys.postgresql.org> <20181011210934.GG7807@momjian.us> <5831541539340923@iva8-3af116a85b74.qloud-c.yandex.net> <20181012150433.GA12966@momjian.us> <1806231539422738@sas1-00d5718ef836.qloud-c.yandex.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1806231539422738@sas1-00d5718ef836.qloud-c.yandex.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 12:25:38PM +0300, KES wrote: > >or NULL if any of the comparisons result in unknown > result in unknown?? Well, SQL has a three-valued logic, and UNKOWN values are treated like NULL. For me they have always been the same, and I would like to avoid "unknown" in this context, if possible. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 13.10.2018, 00:37, "David G. Johnston" : > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:04 AM Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Sorry, but I don't like this wording.  The problem is that the > comparison has two row sets --- the left-hand side, and the right-hand > side. > > > Huh...the left hand side must be a non-set scalar or row constructor. > > >   Each row on the left-hand side is compared with the row set on > the right.  I also don't like people thinking about the result of ANY > since it is really ANY that is being used. > > > Then there is some more rewording to be done since: "The result of ANY is > “true” if any true result is obtained." (v10; 9.22.4) > > Maybe: > > The result of ANY is “true” if the comparison returns true for any subquery > row; otherwise the result is “false” (or NULL if any of the comparisons > result in unknown) > > David J. > > -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +