From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Julian Scarfe <jscarfe(at)callnetuk(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-sql <pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] DISTINCT ON: speak now or forever hold your peace |
Date: | 2000-01-25 22:35:32 |
Message-ID: | 200001252235.RAA25711@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
> (BTW, ordinary SELECT DISTINCT has this same sort of problem if you try
> to ORDER BY an expression that doesn't appear in the target list.
> SQL92 avoids the issue by not allowing you to ORDER BY expressions that
> aren't in the target list, period. We do allow that --- but not when
> you use DISTINCT. Essentially, I want to enforce that same restriction
> for DISTINCT ON.)
>
> The other piece of the puzzle would be to document that DISTINCT ON
> keeps the first tuple out of each set with the same DISTINCT ON value.
>
> Does that sound like a plan?
Yes, very clear. Good.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-01-25 22:38:22 | Re: Happy column adding (was RE: [HACKERS] Happy column dropping) |
Previous Message | Don Baccus | 2000-01-25 21:57:15 | Re: Happy column adding and dropping |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | sej | 2000-01-25 23:33:43 | rachel.jpg |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-01-25 20:08:46 | Re: [SQL] Duplicate tuples with unique index |