In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Josh Berkus"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tom, Gordon,
> Hmmm ... I'm pretty used an external WHERE clause being applied to the
> output of the view, rather than pushed down into the member selects of
> the UNION, in the same way as if the UNION query were a subs
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Josh Berkus"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tom ... and I realize that we're talking about features for version 7.3
> or later ... a direct way to approach it would be to do a push-down on
> simple UNION views, and to do output filtering on UNION views wich
> contain
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Josh Berkus"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tom, Gordon,
> Hmmm ... I'm pretty used an external WHERE clause being applied to the
> output of the view, rather than pushed down into the member selects of
> the UNION, in the same way as if the UNION query were a subse
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> You're correct, an outer WHERE clause will not be pushed down into the
> member selects of a UNION. (This hasn't really got anything to do with
> whether a VIEW is involved.) I haven't gotten round to convincing
> myself abo
I have a number of views that I'm bringing over from DB2 which
have UNIONs in them. Some of the UNIONs have joins.
The views are not working as expected (I'm running 7.1RC2).
It appears that the where clause being applied to the view
by the user is not being distributed properly to the selects.
