From: Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Atri Sharma <atri.jiit@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Aggregate function API versus grouping sets
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 03:32:11 +0200
Message-ID: <53B7559B.2070408@dalibo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87a98rh69d.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
References: <87r424i24w.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
<2240.1404312004@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<87egy3itnx.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
<18963.1404326824@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<87fvijh7hv.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
<21474.1404331405@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<87a98rh69d.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On 07/02/2014 10:15 PM, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> (Had one request so far for a mode() variant that returns the unique
> modal value if one exists, otherwise null; so the current set of
> ordered-set aggs by no means exhausts the possible applications.)
I resemble that remark. :)
But seriously, am I the only one who doesn't want some random value when
there is no dominant one? And the fact that I can't create my own
without C code is a real bummer.
--
Vik
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
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-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: vik.fearing@dalibo.com, andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, atri.jiit@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Aggregate function API versus grouping sets
In-Reply-To: <53B7559B.2070408@dalibo.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