Re: Add RANGE with values and exclusions clauses to the Window Functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oliver Ford <ojford(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add RANGE with values and exclusions clauses to the Window Functions
Date: 2018-01-29 22:50:23
Message-ID: 14068.1517266223@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Oliver Ford <ojford(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Monday, 29 January 2018, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I've started to go through this in some detail, and I'm wondering why
>> you invented a FRAMEOPTION_EXCLUDE_NO_OTHERS option bit rather than
>> just representing that choice as default (0).

> My guess is that it's a little like putting "ORDER BY x ASC" when ASC is
> usually default behavior - it adds some documentation, perhaps for people
> new to SQL or to make your intention more explicit. That's the only reason
> I can think of as to why the standards committee included it.

Yeah, they like to do that. And "ORDER BY x ASC" is actually a precise
precedent, because we don't print ASC either, cf get_rule_orderby().

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oliver Ford 2018-01-29 23:05:39 Re: Add RANGE with values and exclusions clauses to the Window Functions
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2018-01-29 22:49:14 Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v9.0