You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There is no verb for UNION ALL in dplyr. For R data frames, bind_rows() likely works. Even if rows are unique UNION generally does not yield the same result as UNION ALL (e.g., rows get resorted).
If union_all(x, y) were implemented it could be translated as SELECT * FROM x UNION ALL SELECT * FROM y for SQL and (I guess) bind_rows(x, y) for R. (An alternative might be to have bind_rows(x, y) translate into SELECT * FROM x UNION ALL SELECT * FROM y if x and y are in an SQL source.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Actually, bind_rows is more like UNION CORRESPONDING, which is not implemented in PostgreSQL (and other systems). So equating the two would therefore not make sense.
There is no verb for
UNION ALL
indplyr
. For R data frames,bind_rows()
likely works. Even if rows are uniqueUNION
generally does not yield the same result asUNION ALL
(e.g., rows get resorted).If
union_all(x, y)
were implemented it could be translated asSELECT * FROM x UNION ALL SELECT * FROM y
for SQL and (I guess)bind_rows(x, y)
for R. (An alternative might be to havebind_rows(x, y)
translate intoSELECT * FROM x UNION ALL SELECT * FROM y
ifx
andy
are in an SQL source.)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: