Re: GROUPING SETS and SQL standard

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Phil Florent <philflorent(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GROUPING SETS and SQL standard
Date: 2019-11-26 00:39:19
Message-ID: 13772.1574728759@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Phil Florent <philflorent(at)hotmail(dot)com> writes:
> A <grouping specification> of () (called grand total in the Standard) is equivalent to grouping the entire result Table;

Yeah, I believe so. Grouping by no columns is similar to what happens
if you compute an aggregate with no GROUP BY: the whole table is
taken as one group. If the table is empty, the group is empty, but
there's still a group --- that's why you get one aggregate output
value, not none, from

regression=# select count(*) from dual where 0 = 1;
count
-------
0
(1 row)

Thus, in your example, the sub-query should give

regression=# select 1 from dual where 0=1 group by grouping sets(());
?column?
----------
1
(1 row)

and therefore it's correct that

regression=# select count(*) from (select 1 from dual where 0=1 group by grouping sets(())) tmp;
count
-------
1
(1 row)

AFAICS, Oracle and SQL Server are getting it wrong.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andy Fan 2019-11-26 00:59:22 Dynamic gathering the values for seq_page_cost/xxx_cost
Previous Message Phil Florent 2019-11-26 00:16:49 RE: GROUPING SETS and SQL standard