Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> On fre, 2011-12-23 at 13:30 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Well, because it doesn't operate on strings.
>> Sure, binary strings. Both the SQL standard and the PostgreSQL
>> documentation use that term.
> I'm unimpressed by that argument, but let's see what other people think.
I generally agree with Peter: string_agg makes sense here. The only
real argument against it is Pavel's point that he didn't include a
delimiter parameter, but that just begs the question why not. It
seems at least plausible that there would be use-cases for it.
So I think we should try to make this as much like the text case as
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-12-23 21:22:01|
|Subject: Re: WIP: explain analyze with 'rows' but not timing |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-12-23 20:25:57|
|Subject: Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes |