| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | imchifan(at)163(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #19713: WindowAgg qual pushdown gives wrong partition count when scale(numeric) distinguishes equal values |
| Date: | 2026-09-22 16:28:44 |
| Message-ID: | 1187008.1790094524@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> An outer scale(numeric) predicate is pushed below WindowAgg even though
> numeric values 1.0 and 1.00 are equal under PARTITION BY semantics while
> scale() distinguishes them.
Isn't this a duplicate of your own bug #19697, as well as bug #19619?
What's missing from all of these reports is a reason why scale()
would be sane to apply to an aggregated column. Such a query seems
inherently misguided to me, precisely because it is interrogating a
value that isn't guaranteed consistent across an aggregation group.
Is there a real-world use case here, and if so what is it?
regards, tom lane
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/19697-6e7ccba388bbe858@postgresql.org
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/19619-fc646db1c6b2dc90@postgresql.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2026-09-22 16:52:43 | Re: BUG #19649: Qual pushdown into GROUP BY subqueries ignores non-equivalence-preserving references to grouping col |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2026-09-22 16:19:43 | Re: BUG #19712: MultiXact Recovery Deadlock |