From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Nicholas White <n(dot)j(dot)white(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Troels Nielsen <bn(dot)troels(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Re: Request for Patch Feedback: Lag & Lead Window Functions Can Ignore Nulls |
Date: | 2016-05-20 20:41:51 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbCbSuxMP=0qzG7TYd1PE11K4SS5vyJ02aVrL5JBQyMYQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Just doing a drive-by...
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> Old thread link:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+=vxNa5_N1q5q5OkxC0aQnNdbo2Ru6GVw+86wk+oNsUNJDLig@mail.gmail.com
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> > Jeff
> >
> > (Reviving an old thread for 2014...)
>
> > Would you have time to work on this for 9.7..? I came across a
> > real-world use case for exactly this capability and was sorely
> > disappointed to discover we didn't support it even though there had been
> > discussion for years on it, which quite a few interested parties.
> >
> First, I think the syntax is still implemented in a bad way. Right now
> it's part of the OVER clause, and the IGNORE NULLS gets put into the
> frame options. It doesn't match the way the spec defines the grammar,
> and I don't see how it really makes sense that it's a part of the
> frame options or the window object at all.
How does the relatively new FILTER clause play into this, if at all?
I think we need a need catalog support to say
> whether a function honors IGNORE|RESPECT NULLS or not, which means we
> also need support in CREATE FUNCTION.
>
We already have "STRICT" for deciding whether a function processes nulls.
Wouldn't this need to exist on the "CREATE AGGREGATE"
Rhetorical question: I presume we are going to punt on the issue, since it
is non-standard, but what is supposed to happen with a window invocation
that ignores nulls but has a non-strict function that returns a non-null on
null input?
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-05-20 23:34:45 | Re: [PATCH] Add EXPLAIN (ALL) shorthand |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2016-05-20 19:50:30 | Re: Request for Patch Feedback: Lag & Lead Window Functions Can Ignore Nulls |