Re: GROUP BY ALL

From: Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>
To: Andrey Borodin <amborodin86(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GROUP BY ALL
Date: 2022-12-19 16:53:46
Message-ID: 86a93a08-8056-9c9c-7311-019b08458450@postgresfriends.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/19/22 05:19, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> Hi hackers!
>
> I saw a thread in a social network[0] about GROUP BY ALL. The idea seems useful.
> I always was writing something like
> select datname, usename, count(*) from pg_stat_activity group by 1,2;
> and then rewriting to
> select datname, usename, query, count(*) from pg_stat_activity group by 1,2;
> and then "aaahhhh, add a number at the end".
>
> With the proposed feature I can write just
> select datname, usename, count(*) from pg_stat_activity group by all;

We already have GROUP BY ALL, but it doesn't do this.

> PFA very dummy implementation just for a discussion. I think we can
> add all non-aggregating targets.
>
> What do you think?

I think this is a pretty terrible idea. If we want that kind of
behavior, we should just allow the GROUP BY to be omitted since without
grouping sets, it is kind of redundant anyway.

I don't know what my opinion is on that.
--
Vik Fearing

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message gkokolatos 2022-12-19 17:03:21 Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2022-12-19 16:47:13 Re: pgsql: Doc: Explain about Column List feature.