2010/1/28 Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> 2010/1/29 Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>> 2010/1/28 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> simplest could not be a best. There have to be only a const
>>>> expression. But we have not possibility to check it in pg.
>>> Well... that's an entirely arbitrary limitation. I admit that it
>>> doesn't seem likely that someone would want to have a variable
>>> delimiter, but putting extra effort and code complexity into
>>> preventing it seems pointless.
>> It is only a few lines with zero complexity.
>> The main issue of Takahiro proposal is "unclean" behave.
>> we can have a content
>> c1 c2
>> c11, c12,
>> c21, c22
>> and result of string_agg(c1, c2)
>> have to be ?? c11 c12 c21 or c11 c22 c21 ?? What if some content of c2
>> will be NULL ?? I checked oracle. Oracle doesn't allow variable as
>> delimiter. We can't check it. But we can fix first value and using it
>> as constant.
> What about get_fn_expr_arg_stable() to check if the argument is stable
> during aggregate?
I newer know so this function exists. Now we can
a) check and allow only stable params
b) when second parameter is stable, then store it and use it as constant.
I prefer a)
> Hitoshi Harada
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Pavel Stehule||Date: 2010-01-28 17:19:59|
|Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-01-28 17:16:59|
|Subject: Re: Review: listagg aggregate |