Doc: improve description of IN and row-constructor comparisons.
IN and NOT IN work fine on records and arrays, so just say that
they accept "expressions" not "scalar expressions". I think that
that phrasing was meant to say that they don't work on set-returning
expressions, but that's not the com
Doc: improve description of IN and row-constructor comparisons.
IN and NOT IN work fine on records and arrays, so just say that
they accept "expressions" not "scalar expressions". I think that
that phrasing was meant to say that they don't work on set-returning
expressions, but that's not the com
Doc: improve description of IN and row-constructor comparisons.
IN and NOT IN work fine on records and arrays, so just say that
they accept "expressions" not "scalar expressions". I think that
that phrasing was meant to say that they don't work on set-returning
expressions, but that's not the com
Doc: improve description of IN and row-constructor comparisons.
IN and NOT IN work fine on records and arrays, so just say that
they accept "expressions" not "scalar expressions". I think that
that phrasing was meant to say that they don't work on set-returning
expressions, but that's not the com
Doc: improve description of IN and row-constructor comparisons.
IN and NOT IN work fine on records and arrays, so just say that
they accept "expressions" not "scalar expressions". I think that
that phrasing was meant to say that they don't work on set-returning
expressions, but that's not the com
Doc: improve description of IN and row-constructor comparisons.
IN and NOT IN work fine on records and arrays, so just say that
they accept "expressions" not "scalar expressions". I think that
that phrasing was meant to say that they don't work on set-returning
expressions, but that's not the com
Doc: improve description of IN and row-constructor comparisons.
IN and NOT IN work fine on records and arrays, so just say that
they accept "expressions" not "scalar expressions". I think that
that phrasing was meant to say that they don't work on set-returning
expressions, but that's not the com
