| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ORDER BY ALL |
| Date: | 2026-03-25 17:12:53 |
| Message-ID: | 6b4fd1d9-6a0d-4e59-a93f-d8e6b3c960ac@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 24.03.26 09:02, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> Hi! What about SQL standard compatibility? ef38a4d97 was merged only
> after the SQL committee accepted GROUP BY ALL, there was discussion a
> few years before [0] which ended up in nothing because of SQL
> standard... So I wonder what is perspective of this thread
The SQL working group decided not to standardize ORDER BY ALL. Which
means we could implement it without concern that it will be standardized
in a different way.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2026-03-25 17:16:05 | Re: Expanding HOT updates for expression and partial indexes |
| Previous Message | Sami Imseih | 2026-03-25 17:12:35 | Re: Track skipped tables during autovacuum and autoanalyze |