| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: array_agg() NULL Handling |
| Date: | 2010-09-01 17:16:05 |
| Message-ID: | 1CCE16A9-D6B8-4251-B388-1373AFB6D0C7@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sep 1, 2010, at 10:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think when that text was written, it was meant to imply "all the
> aggregates defined in SQL92". There seems to be a lot of confusion
> in this thread about whether "standard" means "defined by SQL spec"
> or "built-in in Postgres". Should we try to refine the wording to
> clarify that?
Yes please.
> Even more to the point, should we deliberately make this vaguer so that
> we aren't finding ourselves with obsolete text again and again? You can
> bet that people adding new aggregates in the future aren't going to
> think to update this sentence, any more than happened with array_agg.
Perhaps “consult the docs for each aggregate to determine how it handles NULLs.”
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-01 17:30:37 | Re: array_agg() NULL Handling |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-01 17:12:25 | Re: array_agg() NULL Handling |