public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
To: David Steele <[email protected]>
Cc: Jürgen Purtz <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Change JOIN tutorial to focus more on explicit joins
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 15:47:15 +1300
Message-ID: <CA+hUKGLkTsAQneHv01S_1sy1=5_EA-ozrERVd6FU9JJcc5J1=w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<160676553158.7563.8055833766353450366.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org>
<[email protected]>
<CAKFQuwauhGRnwqGamn6oHrdP-3v2SR0ELhe_a3w0BtjpkV5q_g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 2:06 AM David Steele <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12/1/20 3:38 AM, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
> > OK. Patch attached.
+ Queries which access multiple tables (including repeats) at once are called
I'd write "Queries that" here (that's is a transatlantic difference in
usage; I try to proofread these things in American mode for
consistency with the rest of the language in this project, which I
probably don't entirely succeed at but this one I've learned...).
Maybe instead of "(including repeats)" it could say "(or multiple
instances of the same table)"?
+ For example, to return all the weather records together with the
location of the
+ associated city, the database compares the <structfield>city</structfield>
column of each row of the <structname>weather</structname> table with the
<structfield>name</structfield> column of all rows in the
<structname>cities</structname>
table, and select the pairs of rows where these values match.
Here "select" should agree with "the database" and take an -s, no?
+ This syntax pre-dates the <literal>JOIN</literal> and <literal>ON</literal>
+ keywords. The tables are simply listed in the <literal>FROM</literal>,
+ comma-separated, and the comparison expression added to the
+ <literal>WHERE</literal> clause.
Could we mention SQL92 somewhere? Like maybe "This syntax pre-dates
the JOIN and ON keywords, which were introduced by SQL-92". (That's a
"non-restrictive which", I think the clue is the comma?)
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Change JOIN tutorial to focus more on explicit joins
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKGLkTsAQneHv01S_1sy1=5_EA-ozrERVd6FU9JJcc5J1=w@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox