From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Micallef <david(dot)j(dot)micallef(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: group by true now errors with non-integer constant in GROUP BY |
Date: | 2023-09-21 07:06:32 |
Message-ID: | CAApHDvrJBCJkahy+LoPqBZ2ETj9-2FuuWj-ct-EKjFJnqZ19dQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 16:58, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 5:01 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > FTR, I still think this is a bad idea. It will add more confusion
> > than it removes, and I don't buy that it will confer any advantages,
> > because nobody asked for it previously.
>
> I agree. Maintaining bug compatibility doesn't seem worth it in this instance.
Thanks for chipping in.
Just for the record, I'm more keen on removing the special case that
disallows this. For me it's more about POLA. I expect that anywhere
I can write an expression in SQL, that I can put a Const in its place
and not receive an error to say constants are disallowed.
I mentioned this to Andres in a meeting yesterday and it seems to be
against allowing Consts, so I seem to be losing this one.
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | 刘相 (佑熙) | 2023-09-21 07:12:18 | 回复:Re: BUG #18118: bug report for COMMIT AND CHAIN feature |
Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2023-09-21 06:41:20 | Re: BUG #18118: bug report for COMMIT AND CHAIN feature |