Re: max(*)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: max(*)
Date: 2006-05-26 19:37:51
Message-ID: 28527.1148672271@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> writes:
> My concern is that it's not inconceiveable to typo max(field) into
> max(*), which could make for a rather frustrating error. Not to mention
> this being something that could trip newbies up. If nothing else I'd say
> it warrants a %TODO just so it doesn't end up on the PostgreSQL gotcha's
> page. :)

count(*) has been implemented that way since about 1999, and no one's
complained yet, so I think you are overstating the importance of the
problem.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • Re: max(*) at 2006-05-26 19:06:29 from Jim C. Nasby

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Seltenreich 2006-05-26 19:45:02 Re: GIN stuck in loop during PITR
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2006-05-26 19:35:20 Re: max(*)