From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP |
Date: | 2005-03-14 16:51:18 |
Message-ID: | 87vf7utbll.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> writes:
> They are aggregate functions, the avg() is a window aggregate function
> according to the standard. It runs over all values in the same partition.
>
> > -- albeit functions that use data from other records other
> > than the one being output.
>
> Yes, and not just one other record, but a number of them. Isn't that what
> aggregate functions are?
Er, yeah. They're aggregate functions in that they consider many records as
input. However they're not aggregate functions in that they produce an output
for every record, as opposed to outputting only one value for a whole group.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-14 18:39:59 | Re: BUG #1542: pg_dump seg fault |
Previous Message | Dennis Bjorklund | 2005-03-14 15:59:28 | Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-14 16:57:15 | Re: signed short fd |
Previous Message | pgsql | 2005-03-14 16:40:14 | Re: signed short fd |