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

Re: Review: listagg aggregate

From: Alastair Turner <bell(at)ctrlf5(dot)co(dot)za>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate
Date: 2010-01-26 11:23:58
Message-ID: 24e589521001260323i6405009cr6b60934954dd1e3@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 1:08 PM, David E. Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> wrote:

.....

>
> Because it's an aggregate that cocatenates values. It's not an aggregate
> that lists things. I also like concat_agg better than string_agg because
> it's not limited to acting on strings.
>

.....

Given that it potentially produces a delimited list, not a straight
conacatenation (and that list is unacceptable since it would be
descriptive as a noun but not as a verb) would implode_agg not be the
most descriptive name?

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alastair TurnerDate: 2010-01-26 11:44:34
Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate
Previous:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2010-01-26 11:08:16
Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate

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