>>The original statement was Re: Performance - union Thread #1534182 Message #1534224 : The EXISTS can be replaced with LEFT JOIN
>>
>>(1) I do not see why you would need a LEFT JOIN - if you do you have to add : where .. is not null
>>(2) You cannot just replace it. You need to add DISTINCT
>>
>
>
>The statement meant (not written) was that LEFT JOIN with IS NULL can be replaced with NOT EXISTS.

I did not understand it that way

>
>INNER JOIN and EXISTS are not equivalent if we're talking about 1:many or many to many type of relationship.

Which was my original point to Mike