| From: | "Peter Kovacs" <maxottovonstirlitz(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Cheers for DISTINCT ON |
| Date: | 2008-01-07 16:02:27 |
| Message-ID: | b6e8f2e80801070802n7b04b0e3lbbec1d284bef1f9f@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
I just wanted to give my cheers for DISTINCT ON. It is a great
feature, I've just found a really good use for it. I am just wondering
why it didn't make it into the standards.
On a slightly unrelated note, I had the opportunity to work with EQUEL
for a short period of time some 15 years ago before I started getting
famililar with SQL. I clearly remember the disappointment/surprise I
felt as I was struggling to translate some of the constructs I used
with EQUEL into SQL. At that time, I thought that (the by then
defunct) EQUEL was much more
expressive/intuitive/flexible/easier-to-use than SQL. I've been
wondering ever since why the worse so often gets the upper-hand over
the better. (I am obviously having a hard time "growing-up" :-) )
Cheers,
Peter
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2008-01-07 16:18:12 | Re: Cheers for DISTINCT ON |
| Previous Message | Gerardo Herzig | 2008-01-07 14:26:09 | Re: reading WAL files in python |