From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division] |
Date: | 2013-06-21 09:02:28 |
Message-ID: | CAEZATCVx27ZXqWe-xX_yTqKbvOQMQpftFMCJKdON3Qd2-1quhQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 21 June 2013 06:16, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:10:25AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> David Fetter escribió:
>> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 08:59:27PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>>
>> > > In my testing of sub-queries in the FILTER clause (an extension to the
>> > > spec), I was able to produce the following error:
>> >
>> > Per the spec,
>> >
>> > B) A <filter clause> shall not contain a <query expression>, a <window function>, or an outer reference.
>>
>> If this is not allowed, I think there should be a clearer error message.
>> What Dean showed is an internal (not user-facing) error message.
>
> Please find attached a patch which allows subqueries in the FILTER
> clause and adds regression testing for same.
>
Nice!
I should have pointed out that it was already working for some
sub-queries, just not all. It's good to see that it was basically just
a one-line fix, because I think it would have been a shame to not
support sub-queries.
I hope to take another look at it over the weekend.
Regards,
Dean
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-06-21 09:19:56 | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2013-06-21 08:57:46 | Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division] |