From: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Ian Caulfield" <ian(dot)caulfield(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: array_agg and array_accum (patch) |
Date: | 2008-10-29 04:08:50 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070810282108m3f4dc1d3qe4e127b5268ecb81@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
It's worth noting that this is the third version of this idea that has
been submitted. Ian Caulfield submitted a patch to add this, and so
did I. Someone should probably look at all three of them and compare.
...Robert
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 18:47 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> How else will you tell an aggregate function whose result depends on the
>> input order which order you want? The only aggregates defined in the
>> standard where this matters are array_agg, array_accum, and xmlagg, but
>
> I don't see array_accum() in the standard, I wrote it just as an
> alternative to array_agg() because I thought array_agg() ignored NULLs.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2008-10-29 05:16:12 | Re: PostgreSQL + Replicator developer meeting 10/28 |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2008-10-29 03:45:30 | Re: BufferAccessStrategy for bulk insert |