| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(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 18:09:05 |
| Message-ID: | 16153.1264529345@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> Meh. This is all just bike-shedding. I'm fine with string_agg(), though in truth none of the names has really been great. The inclusion of "agg" in the name is unfortunate.
Yeah, I wouldn't be for it either if it weren't for the precedent of
array_agg. I was quite surprised that the SQL committee chose that
name, because they've avoided using the term "aggregate function" at
all, but there it is ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2010-01-26 18:13:25 | Re: ECPGset_var |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-01-26 18:04:23 | Re: Review: listagg aggregate |