X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B99FDA49B for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:19:29 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 67076-01 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:19:30 +0000 (GMT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 893D5DA4EB for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:19:26 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jALLJSkU004272; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:19:28 -0500 (EST) To: gry@ll.mit.edu cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: tid_le comparison for tuple id (ctid) values? In-reply-to: <20051121160016.282c66c2.gry@ll.mit.edu> References: <20051121160016.282c66c2.gry@ll.mit.edu> Comments: In-reply-to george young message dated "Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:00:16 -0500" Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:19:28 -0500 Message-ID: <4271.1132607968@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.004 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.004] X-Spam-Score: 0.004 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200511/181 X-Sequence-Number: 23432 george young writes: > update steps set x=x||'X' from steps s where steps.key1=s.key1 and steps.key2=s.key2 and step.ctid But this fails because there is no less-than operator (or function) on > type "tid". Probably a good thing, too, since if there was it wouldn't have anything reliable to do with the age of the tuple. regards, tom lane