A. Kretschmer wrote:
> In response to Angus Miller :
> > Hi
> >
> > Given the sql below shouldn't I get the 3 records back?
>
> No, why?
Oh,... sorry, right. 8.1 returns 3 rows, see Tom's answer.
Andreas
--
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintention
Thanks Tom I can confirm this passed in 8.4.1
Tom Lane wrote:
Angus Miller writes:
Given the sql below shouldn't I get the 3 records back?
Try 8.4.1 --- I think you got bit by the semijoin ordering bugs in
8.4.0.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-gene
In response to Angus Miller :
> Hi
>
> Given the sql below shouldn't I get the 3 records back?
No, why?
>
> create table t1 (attribute text);
> insert into t1 values ('cars');
> insert into t1 values ('trucks');
> insert into t1 values ('bikes');
>
> create table t2 (id serial, category text,
Angus Miller writes:
> Given the sql below shouldn't I get the 3 records back?
Try 8.4.1 --- I think you got bit by the semijoin ordering bugs in
8.4.0.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subsc
Hi
Given the sql below shouldn't I get the 3 records back?
create table t1 (attribute text);
insert into t1 values ('cars');
insert into t1 values ('trucks');
insert into t1 values ('bikes');
create table t2 (id serial, category text, attribute text, val integer);
insert into t2(category, attri
