Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87b40ca1-f935-4d71-9edb-9d9f1053cb45@eisentraut.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 26.09.25 22:18, Tom Lane wrote: > Got it, mostly. There is an edge case, though: what if there are no > candidate grouping items? I see these test cases in David's patch: > > +-- oops all aggregates > +EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) SELECT COUNT(a), SUM(b) FROM t1 GROUP BY ALL; > + QUERY PLAN > +---------------------- > + Aggregate > + -> Seq Scan on t1 > +(2 rows) > + > +-- empty column list > +EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) SELECT FROM t1 GROUP BY ALL; > + QUERY PLAN > +---------------- > + Seq Scan on t1 > +(1 row) > > That is, in such cases the patch behaves as if there were no GROUP BY > clause at all, which seems kinda dubious. Should this be an error, > and if not what's it supposed to do? These should resolve to GROUP BY (). > Also, what about window functions in the tlist? > (I didn't stop to figure out why this isn't giving the same error, but > maybe it's an order-of-checks thing.) In any case: should this give > "window functions are not allowed in GROUP BY", or should the > window-function-containing tlist item be silently skipped by GROUP BY > ALL? Trying to make it work is surely not the right answer. Hmm, I don't know. The syntactic transformation talks about select list elements that "do not directly contain an <aggregate function>", but that can also appear as part of <window function>, so the syntactic transformation might appear to apply only to some types of window functions, which doesn't make sense to me. I don't know what a sensible behavior should be here. Maybe in this first patch version just reject use of GROUP BY ALL if you find any window functions in the select list.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: