Re: Aggregate ORDER BY patch

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Aggregate ORDER BY patch
Date: 2009-11-13 15:44:55
Message-ID: 1258127095.4818.1.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On fre, 2009-11-13 at 10:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not entirely convinced that adding ORDER BY here is a good idea,
> partly because it goes so far beyond the spec

This is exactly the syntax that is in the spec AFAICT.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian G. Pflug 2009-11-13 15:46:32 Re: Check constraint on domain over an array not executed for array literals
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-11-13 15:44:25 Re: Aggregate ORDER BY patch