Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division]
Date: 2013-06-27 03:05:44
Message-ID: 7321.1372302344@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> Possibly significant in this context is that there is a proof-of-concept
> patch in development for another part of T612, namely inverse
> distribution functions (e.g. percentile_disc and percentile_cont) which
> should be available by the next CF, and which will require a similar
> decision with respect to the keyword WITHIN (to support doing:
> select percentile_cont(0.5) within group (order by x) from ...;
> which returns the median value of x).

Agreed, separating out the function-call-with-trailing-declaration
syntaxes so they aren't considered in FROM and index_elem seems like
the best compromise.

If we do that for window function OVER clauses as well, can we make
OVER less reserved?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Singer 2013-06-27 03:21:17 Re: [PATCH] Fix conversion for Decimal arguments in plpython functions
Previous Message KONDO Mitsumasa 2013-06-27 02:17:21 Re: [PATCH] add --progress option to pgbench (submission 3)