From: | "Daniel Verite" <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [patch] Proposal for \rotate in psql |
Date: | 2015-09-04 16:08:10 |
Message-ID: | 80a0d080-5549-4ffa-b1ee-79cf6e7019bf@mm |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> the name "rotate" is not correct - maybe "\cross" ?
I'm not dead set on \rotate and suggested other names
previously in [1], but none of them seems decisively
superior.
The rationale behind rotate is that, it's a synonym of pivot
as a verb, and it's not already used for other things in SQL.
Incidentally I'm discovering by googling that people actually
searched previously for that feature with that name:
http://postgresql.nabble.com/rotate-psql-output-td3046832.html
OTOH "cross" is already used in the database vocabulary for
cross joins. Also I find it used too in "cross-db queries" or the
"cross apply" of other engines.
I think that plays against it for choosing it to designate
something different again.
However, maybe \across may be a better fit, or "cross"
combined with some other word, as in \crossview .
Not sure how that sounds to a native english speaker.
[1]
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cd521513-1349-4698-b93c-693199962e23@mm
Best regards,
--
Daniel Vérité
PostgreSQL-powered mailer: http://www.manitou-mail.org
Twitter: @DanielVerite
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2015-09-04 16:10:47 | Re: PATCH: index-only scans with partial indexes |
Previous Message | Nikolay Shaplov | 2015-09-04 16:05:11 | Re: pageinspect patch, for showing tuple data |