From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Hiroaki Nakamura" <hnakamur(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Is this correct usage of generate_series? |
Date: | 2008-05-23 12:21:34 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150805230521q2c0eba16oe8d3ed3f96350a26@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I have seen discussions in the past on the -hackers mailing list about
> deprecating the usage of SRFs in select list, but honestly, I don't see this
> usage being deprecated anytime soon; it's pretty useful, and I would call it
> an extension to the SQL language. And as long as it's nit buggy, and ALA it
> doesn't surprise people in a wrong way, I think such usage will remain.
I think it's useful too...I have a good example of how it can simplify
a query in the archives.
My main gripe with 'SRF in select' is multiple SRF in the select list...
select a(), b() from foo;
The current behavior gives you LCM(a(), b()) * foo records...I think
the expected behavior would be a * b * foo (foo being number of
records in foo).
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Howard Cole | 2008-05-23 13:02:16 | Re: Error: Could not open relation... |
Previous Message | Stephane Bortzmeyer | 2008-05-23 12:16:52 | Re: XML Support related questions |