Re: review: More frame options in window functions

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: review: More frame options in window functions
Date: 2010-02-08 19:39:44
Message-ID: 4B706880.9090509@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/8/10 11:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Given the lack of time remaining in this CF, I'm tempted to propose
> ripping out the RANGE support and just trying to get ROWS committed.
> That should be substantially less controversial from a semantic
> standpoint, and it still seems like a considerable improvement in
> functionality.

+1

--Josh Berkus

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Weimer 2010-02-08 19:50:37 Re: Confusion over Python drivers
Previous Message Marko Tiikkaja 2010-02-08 19:30:03 Writeable CTEs and empty relations