X-Original-To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B4C84758F1 for ; Sat, 10 May 2003 23:19:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BEBF475F0D for ; Sat, 10 May 2003 23:19:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h4B3JoU6010882; Sat, 10 May 2003 23:19:50 -0400 (EDT) To: Randall Lucas Cc: Rod Taylor , pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: merge-join for domain with underlying type text In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Randall Lucas message dated "Sat, 10 May 2003 20:53:21 -0400" Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 23:19:49 -0400 Message-ID: <10881.1052623189@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) X-Archive-Number: 200305/201 X-Sequence-Number: 13366 Randall Lucas writes: > Hackers, why is this? It seems to me that since everything else (or > everything I've run into so far, up to the full outer joins) is > implicitly the same for a simple domain and its underlying base type, > that it would make sense if this, too, Just Worked. It does Just Work ... in CVS tip. I can't make it magically work in 7.3 --- at least not without back-patching a lot of stuff that hasn't been through beta-testing yet. The problem is that mergejoin in existing releases will only work on plain "Var = Var" clauses. Your domain case doesn't look like that because of the runtime cast operators. regards, tom lane