Re: sql row constructor...works!

>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:17 , Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>
>> > The proper SQL construct without row constructor is:
>> >
>> > select * from t where
>> > a >= a1 and
>> > (a > a1 or b>= b1) and
>> > (a > a1 or b > b1 or c > c1)
>> > order by a,b,c limit 1 ^ no offset necessary
>> >
>> > confused yet?

No, not confused, that's closer to an example...

>> This is interesting! Could you also provide the equivalent *with* a
>> row constructor? (or did I miss that somewhere?)
>
> select * from t where (a,b,c) > (a1, b1, c1) order by a,b,c limit 1;
> [plus full usage of key on t(a,b,c)]

Ah, so _that_ is the new notation that works now? That's neat indeed.
--
"cbbrowne","@","gmail.com"
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/slony.html
"Instant coffee is like pouring hot water over the cremated remains of
a good friend."