6 ms·
Without any further knowledge, what I think they did is not so much express execution order in the RDBMS engine sense, but some logical generic-to-specific, lar
by karamanolev 4y ago
Without any further knowledge, what I think they did is not so much express execution order in the RDBMS engine sense, but some logical generic-to-specific, large-to-small order. Table first (all rows, all columns), WHERE after (filter row), SELECT/project (filter columns). I'm not sure where all the other SQL operators would fit in that order, especially JOINs, GROUP BYs and so on.
- cmrdporcupine 4y agoYeah I guess the thing is that that 'logical' ordering is entirely arbitrary. It makes sense to this author I guess, but wouldn't to others. SQL's syntax is crap, but I don't see any advantages to this. Chris Date's Tutorial D had alternate syntax proposals. Personally I'd go for something more terse, like in the Rel Project's impl of the D concepts: USER {ID, FIRST_NAME} WHERE LAST_NAME= NAME($lastName) https://reldb.org/c/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Rel-and-Tutorial-D-Quickstart.pdf https://reldb.org/c/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Rel-and-Tutor...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]