| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong results with grouping sets |
| Date: | 2024-07-04 21:51:40 |
| Message-ID: | 20240704215140.un6ti3hlnjllvlh4@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2024-07-01 16:29:16 +0800, Richard Guo wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 5:05 PM Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > This patchset does not apply any more. Here is a new rebase.
>
> Here is an updated version of this patchset. I've run pgindent for it,
> and also tweaked the commit messages a bit.
>
> In principle, 0001 can be backpatched to all supported versions to fix
> the cases where there are subqueries in the grouping expressions; 0002
> can be backpatched to 16 where we have the nullingrels stuff. But both
> patches seem to be quite invasive. I'm not sure if we want to backpatch
> them to stable branches. Any thoughts about backpatching?
As-is they can't be backpatched, unless I am missing something? Afaict they
introduce rather thorough ABI breaks? And API breaks, actually?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Noah Misch | 2024-07-04 22:08:16 | Re: race condition in pg_class |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2024-07-04 21:26:41 | Re: Built-in CTYPE provider |