From: Tomasz Myrta <jasiek@klaster.net>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
To: Tomasz Myrta <jasiek@klaster.net>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: sub-select with aggregate
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:51:29 +0900
Message-ID: <20021024175129.M3214@klaster.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021024081033.U20230-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
References: <3DB7BF5A.1090606@klaster.net>
<20021024081033.U20230-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
> The system doesn't realize that it can limit the subquery when the only
> things it has is the join clause and the limiting clause on the other
> table. Like Tom's message about the other view, it won't imply that
> X.foo=12345 from foo=12345 when the exposed foo is B.foo.
Is this what we should expect, or rather a bug?
The system knows how to join tables, but fails with joining views or
subselects :-(
Tomasz Myrta
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: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: jasiek@klaster.net, sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com
Subject: Re: sub-select with aggregate
In-Reply-To: <20021024175129.M3214@klaster.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox