| From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Joe Conway" <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "Jorge Godoy" <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Stefan Schwarzer" <stefan(dot)schwarzer(at)grid(dot)unep(dot)ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Crosstab Problems |
| Date: | 2007-10-25 14:29:33 |
| Message-ID: | dcc563d10710250729s45cc418apf4044003b077f0cb@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-patches |
On 10/24/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> 1. Treat NULL rowid as a category in its own right. This would conform
> >> with the behavior of GROUP BY and DISTINCT, for instance.
>
> > In any case, the attached changes the behavior to #1 for both flavors of
> > crosstab (the original crosstab(text, int) and the usually more useful
> > crosstab(text, text)).
>
> > It is appropriate for 8.3 but not back-patching as it changes behavior
> > in a non-backward compatible way and is probably too invasive anyway.
>
> Um, if the previous code crashed in this case, why would you worry about
> being backward-compatible with it? You're effectively changing the
> behavior anyway, so you might as well make it do what you've decided is
> the right thing.
As a crosstab user, I agree with Tom.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-25 14:30:40 | Re: select count() out of memory |
| Previous Message | Roberts, Jon | 2007-10-25 14:25:13 | Re: subversion support? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-10-25 14:45:55 | pgsql: Extract catalog info for error reporting before an error actually |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-10-25 12:29:25 | Re: two new chklocale aliases |