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

Re: TODO items for window functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TODO items for window functions
Date: 2008-12-30 19:58:50
Message-ID: 29282.1230667130@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> Presumably psql should know about this change.  Should \df now include
> windowing functions along with a boolean column that indicates whether
> a function is a windowing function?  Should there be \dw[+] instead?

> In either case, should the S option indicating "include system
> functions only when S is present" (e.g. \dwS) apply?

If people are going to start proposing that, I'm going to switch back to
the position that WINDOW should be treated as an attribute.  The whole
point of the discussion is that no one wanted to get into the game of
treating window functions as a separate classification in general.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Devrim GÜNDÜZDate: 2008-12-30 20:12:41
Subject: New shapshot RPMs (Dec 29, 2008) are ready for testing
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-12-30 19:36:17
Subject: Re: about truncate

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