| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Scott Bailey <artacus(at)comcast(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Review: listagg aggregate |
| Date: | 2010-01-26 16:03:57 |
| Message-ID: | 10107.1264521837@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2010/1/25 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 2:27 PM, David E. Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> wrote:
>>> concat_agg().
>>
>> I like that one...
> why is concat_agg better than listagg ?
It isn't ... it's the wrong part of speech. "concat"enate is a verb,
whereas the other functions we would like it to be named parallel to
are using nouns there.
(Yes, I know "array" can be used as a verb, but I don't think anyone
reads it that way in "array_agg"...)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-01-26 16:15:36 | Re: Review: listagg aggregate |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-01-26 15:24:09 | Re: Review: listagg aggregate |