| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql |
| Date: | 2016-02-17 22:06:03 |
| Message-ID: | 56C4EECB.3060103@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/17/16 9:03 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> I'm not totally opposed to specifying a column sort order in psql, and
> perhaps there's a way to support both 'cols' and 'col_order' options
> in psql, since there are different situations where one or the other
> might be more useful.
Yeah. If there was some magic way to reference the underlying data with
your syntax it probably wouldn't be that bad. AIUI normally we're just
dumping data into a Portal and there's no option to read back from it,
but if the query results were first put in a tuplestore then I suspect
it wouldn't be that hard to query against it and produce another result set.
> What I am opposed to is specifying the row order in psql, because IMO
> that's something that should be done entirely in the SQL query.
+1
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2016-02-17 22:13:29 | Re: [HACKERS] Packaging of postgresql-jdbc |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-02-17 22:02:08 | Re: Figures in docs |