public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
Cc: David Christensen <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 18:29:35 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwY0vhNG8T+pC3BQJurFi3NN_L1KbEPGagRN3V5nKZcpDQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHM0NXjz0kDwtzoe-fnHAqPB1qA8_VJN0XAmCgUZ+iPnvP5LbA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKFQuwY0vhNG8T+pC3BQJurFi3NN_L1KbEPGagRN3V5nKZcpDQ@mail.gmail.com>
"David G. Johnston" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 1:55 PM David Christensen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I see that there'd been some chatter but not a lot of discussion about
>> a GROUP BY ALL feature/functionality. There certainly is utility in
>> such a construct IMHO.
> I strongly dislike adding this feature. I'd only consider supporting it if
> it was part of the SQL standard.
Yeah ... my recollection is that we already rejected this idea.
If you want to re-litigate that, "throwing this out there" is
not a sufficient argument.
(Personally, I'd wonder exactly what ALL is quantified over: the
whole output of the FROM clause, or only columns mentioned in the
SELECT tlist, or what? And why that choice rather than another?)
regards, tom lane
view thread (43+ messages) latest in thread
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox