Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL

From: David Christensen <david(at)pgguru(dot)net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
Date: 2025-09-26 15:59:26
Message-ID: CAHM0NXjic04De6eMcYLZ+-u1t-7uBEU6xXgatz6eb-MECytetg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 10:54 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
>
> On 26.09.25 16:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
> >> The initially proposed patch appears to have the right idea overall.
> >> But it does not handle more complex cases like
> >> SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY ALL;
> >
> >> (For explanation: GROUP BY ALL expands to all select list entries that
> >> do not contain aggregates. So the above would expand to
> >> SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY a;
> >> which should then be rejected based on the existing rules.)
> >
> > I thought I understood this definition, up till your last
> > comment. What's invalid about that expanded query?
> >
> > regression=# create table t1 (a int, b int);
> > CREATE TABLE
> > regression=# SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY a;
> > a | ?column?
> > ---+----------
> > (0 rows)
>
> This was a sloppy example. Here is a better one:
>
> create table t1 (a int, b int, c int);
>
> select a, sum(b)+c from t1 group by all;
>
> This is equivalent to
>
> select a, sum(b)+c from t1 group by a;
>
> which would be rejected as
>
> ERROR: column "t1.c" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used
> in an aggregate function

Verified that with v2 that this is what happens in this case; will
include this and whatever other feedback there is in a v3.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2025-09-26 16:01:20 Re: test_json_parser/002_inline is kind of slow
Previous Message Robert Haas 2025-09-26 15:55:51 Re: test_json_parser/002_inline is kind of slow