From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
To: Pantelis Theodosiou <ypercube@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: DISTINCT term in aggregate function
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 19:05:52 +0100
Message-ID: <48e7af6c-a997-e361-3dec-1382a5824831@enterprisedb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE3TBxyiC0ivwhAVAeL8C8G6UUpyQ+WKUrEnRZ7LsE-LRXzR8A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <bf3805a8-d7d1-ae61-fece-761b7ff41ecc@postgresfriends.org>
<c350ff6b-d70d-9952-be23-a18855b62589@postgresfriends.org>
<161469758801.29967.4455067072614569957.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org>
<4294e82f-a134-5dbb-d9d6-03d72dce2e1e@postgresfriends.org>
<b95ee556-c527-04b8-6cae-f55950dde94b@enterprisedb.com>
<CAE3TBxyAKwqJodfbOCdWy2ome1=ojyaboqiqTmdYCBG_1=JCZw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAE3TBxyiC0ivwhAVAeL8C8G6UUpyQ+WKUrEnRZ7LsE-LRXzR8A@mail.gmail.com>
Sorry, I'm not reading pgsql-docs very often, so I missed the post.
Yeah, we should probably add an indexterm to the other places too.
regards
On 3/18/21 7:03 PM, Pantelis Theodosiou wrote:
> Hi, I didn't think of including you in this suggestion.
> Or the pdsql-docs was not the right list to post? I didn't want to mix
> it with the GROUP BY DISTINCT patch.
>
> Please check my suggestion.
>
> Best regards
> Pantelis Theodosiou
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Pantelis Theodosiou* <ypercube@gmail.com <mailto:ypercube@gmail.com>>
> Date: Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 1:03 AM
> Subject: Fwd: GROUP BY DISTINCT
> To: <pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
> <mailto:pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org>>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Tomas Vondra* <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com
> <mailto:tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>>
> Date: Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 11:33 PM
> Subject: Re: GROUP BY DISTINCT
> To: Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org
> <mailto:vik@postgresfriends.org>>, Georgios Kokolatos
> <gkokolatos@protonmail.com <mailto:gkokolatos@protonmail.com>>,
> <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
> <mailto:pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>>
> Cc: Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl <mailto:er@xs4all.nl>>
>
>
> Hi Vik,
>
> The patch seems quite ready, I have just two comments.
>
> 1) Shouldn't this add another <indexterm> for DISTINCT, somewhere in the
> documentation? Now the index points just to the SELECT DISTINCT part.
>
> .....
>
> regards
>
> --
> Tomas Vondra
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com <http://www.enterprisedb.com;
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
>
>
> After reading the above thread in hackers, I noticed that the index does
> not point to aggrgeate functions either and DISTINCT is not mentioned in
> the aggregate functions page
> either: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/functions-aggregate.html
> <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/functions-aggregate.html;
> Shouldn't it be mentioned with an example of COUNT(DISTINCT ...) or
> aggregate_function(DISTINCT ...) in general ?
>
> Best regards
>
> Pantelis Theodosiou
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com, ypercube@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: DISTINCT term in aggregate function
In-Reply-To: <48e7af6c-a997-e361-3dec-1382a5824831@enterprisedb.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox