On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 02:37:33PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:04 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I don't like this wording. The problem is that the
> comparison has two row sets --- the left-hand side, and the right-hand
> side.
>
>
> Huh...t
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:04 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Sorry, but I don't like this wording. The problem is that the
> comparison has two row sets --- the left-hand side, and the right-hand
> side.
Huh...the left hand side must be a non-set scalar or row constructor.
Each row on the left-ha
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 01:42:03PM +0300, KES wrote:
> - The result is NULL if the comparison does not return true for any row,
> + The result is NULL if no comparison with a subquery row returns true,
> and it returns NULL for at least one row.
> -The result of ANY is “true” if the compari
either it is hard to understand. I will rephrase one part to show how it is easy to understand from my side:>ALL> The result is “false” if any false result is found. The result of ALL is "false" even if *at least one* row yield false(we can use 'some' word here, but it is not such clear as *at lea
- The result is NULL if the comparison does not return true for any row,+ The result is NULL if no comparison with a subquery row returns true, and it returns NULL for at least one row.-The result of ANY is “true” if the comparison returns true for any subquery row. The result is “false” if
