| From: | Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Nicholas White <n(dot)j(dot)white(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Troels Nielsen <bn(dot)troels(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Request for Patch Feedback: Lag & Lead Window Functions Can Ignore Nulls |
| Date: | 2016-05-29 11:49:08 |
| Message-ID: | CAE2gYzyX8y4t_6RJX3bqmhhwm=1q_pFkJ73mcsVZeMXkFsAw+w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> My interpretation of the standard is that FILTER is not allowable for
> a window function, and IGNORE|RESPECT NULLS is not allowable for an
> ordinary aggregate.
Yes, it is clear.
> So if we support IGNORE|RESPECT NULLS for anything other than a window
> function, we have to come up with our own semantics.
I don't think this clause is useful for aggregates especially while we
already have the FILTER clause. Though, I can see this error message
being useful:
> ERROR: IGNORE NULLS is only implemented for the lead and lag window functions
Can we still give this message when the syntax is not part of the OVER clause?
Thank you for returning back to this patch.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2016-05-29 15:05:53 | Re: Does people favor to have matrix data type? |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2016-05-29 05:44:26 | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |