Date: Sat, 18 May 2024 17:30:36 +0200
From: Erik Wienhold <ewie@ewie.name>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Shammat <shammat@gmx.net>, 
	"pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Left join syntax error
Message-ID: <5150aba7-b6e4-4c40-a357-9dd7528ec870@ewie.name>
References: <2c877258-61cc-dd2d-fac7-4f2a5c6293e7@appl-ecosys.com>
 <9d899286-3a73-4894-a6e0-eab529c92e65@gmx.net>
 <7d422a60-c581-485d-b5fd-4b2bb284b919@ewie.name>
 <CAKFQuwZs4ma+K4XS7x6waVbHa6J4=FzpPhK+_TLXMnyFJzdkZQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwZs4ma+K4XS7x6waVbHa6J4=FzpPhK+_TLXMnyFJzdkZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5150aba7-b6e4-4c40-a357-9dd7528ec870%40ewie.name>
Precedence: bulk

On 2024-05-18 17:12 +0200, David G. Johnston wrote:
> Too lazy to find the docs right now but what you are observing is basically
> an operator precedence effect.  The comma join hasn’t happened at the time
> the left join is evaluated and so other tables in the comma join cannot
> appear in the on clause of the left join.  Placing everything inside a
> single from slot and moving the conditions to the where clause removes
> changes the precedence aspect so that the cross join does indeed evaluate
> prior to the left join.

Thanks David.  The docs on table expressions clarify the precedence:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/queries-table-expressions.html#QUERIES-FROM

I'm using SQL for 17 years now and yet I still forget that joins are
table expressions m(

-- 
Erik