Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Review: listagg aggregate

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Scott Bailey <artacus(at)comcast(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate
Date: 2010-01-26 18:09:05
Message-ID: 16153.1264529345@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> Meh. This is all just bike-shedding. I'm fine with string_agg(), though in truth none of the names has really been great. The inclusion of "agg" in the name is unfortunate.

Yeah, I wouldn't be for it either if it weren't for the precedent of
array_agg.  I was quite surprised that the SQL committee chose that
name, because they've avoided using the term "aggregate function" at
all, but there it is ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Boszormenyi ZoltanDate: 2010-01-26 18:13:25
Subject: Re: ECPGset_var
Previous:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2010-01-26 18:04:23
Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group