From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | ojford(at)gmail(dot)com |
Cc: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk, david(at)fetter(dot)org, krasiyan(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options |
Date: | 2025-01-22 11:58:18 |
Message-ID: | 20250122.205818.930169577391749915.ishii@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Attached version moves the setting of IGNORE_NULLS to the window
> function itself, with the functions that don't allow it erroring out.
> This is done with a new api: WinCheckAndInitializeNullTreatment.
>
> Custom functions that don't call this will simply not have the
> IGNORE_NULLS option set as this api initializes the option and the
> array. As per the previous discussion, it should have correct
> formatting and handle the Exclusion clauses correctly.
I played with the v4 patch. It seems lead() produces incorrect result:
test=# SELECT x,y,lead(y) IGNORE NULLS OVER (ORDER BY x) FROM (VALUES(1,NULL),(2,2),(3,NULL)) AS v(x,y);
x | y | lead
---+---+------
1 | | 2
2 | 2 | 2
3 | | 2
(3 rows)
I think correct result of "lead" column is 2, NULL, NULL.
Best reagards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS K.K.
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Laurenz Albe | 2025-01-22 12:30:17 | Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects |
Previous Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2025-01-22 11:53:35 | RE: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |