Re: onlyvalue aggregate (was: First Aggregate Funtion?)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: onlyvalue aggregate (was: First Aggregate Funtion?) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25583.1446053910@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | onlyvalue aggregate (was: First Aggregate Funtion?) (Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to>) |
Ответы |
Re: onlyvalue aggregate (was: First Aggregate Funtion?)
Re: onlyvalue aggregate (was: First Aggregate Funtion?) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to> writes: > Here's a patch for the aggregate function outlined by Corey Huinker in > CADkLM=foA_oC_Ri23F9PbfLnfwXFbC3Lt8bBzRu3=CB77G9_qw@mail.gmail.com . I > called it "onlyvalue", which is a horrible name, but I have nothing > better to offer. (Corey called it "only", but that doesn't really work > since ONLY is a fully reserved keyword.) On the name front, maybe think "single" rather than "only"? This might lead to "single()" or "single_value()", or "singleton()" if you want to sound highbrow. On the semantics front, I'm not sure that I like excluding nulls from the input domain. I'd rather that it acted like IS NOT DISTINCT, ie, nulls are fine as long as all the input values are nulls. The implementation would need some work for that. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: