From: | "David Rowley" <dgrowley(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "'Hitoshi Harada'" <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Window Functions patch v06 |
Date: | 2008-10-13 23:02:36 |
Message-ID: | 9571E61244484B6F8A622002647516C9@amd64 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>I made up my mind to scratch former window functions and redesigned
>completely new execution model, based on the discussion with Heikki.
>Attached is the v06 against HEAD today.
>http://umitanuki.net/pgsql/wfv06/design.html
First off, fantastic work!
In my eyes this and WITH RECURSIVE are a big step for both Postgres and open
source RBDMS'.
Only, one small query with LEAD() and LAG()
Going by http://www.wiscorp.com/sql200n.zip
"The lead and lag functions each take three arguments, a <value expression>
VE, an <exact numeric literal>
OFFSET, and a <value expression> DEFAULT. For each row R within the window
partition P of R defined by
a window structure descriptor, the lag function returns the value of VE
evaluated on a row that is OFFSET
number of rows before R within P, and the lead function returns the value of
VE evaluated on a row that is
OFFSET number of rows after R within P. The value of DEFAULT is returned as
the result if there is no row
corresponding to the OFFSET number of rows before R within P (for the lag
function) or after R within P (for
the lead function). In addition, RESPECT NULLS or IGNORE NULLS can be
specified to indicate whether
the rows within P for which VE evaluates to the null value are preserved or
eliminated"
So going by that:
SELECT name,LAG(name,1,'None') OVER (ORDER BY employeeid) FROM employee;
Would use 'None' for rows that would be out of the bounds of the window.
The current patch only seems to accept 2 arguments.
ERROR: function lag(character varying, integer, unknown) does not exist
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-10-13 23:15:34 | Re: WITH RECURSIVE ... CYCLE in vanilla SQL: issues with arrays of rows |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-13 23:01:29 | Re: WITH RECURSIVE ... CYCLE in vanilla SQL: issues with arrays of rows |