Re: Closing some 8.4 open items

2009/4/11 Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>:
>>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
>  >>> Perhaps more to the point: the previous round of discussion about
>  >>> this already rejected the idea of treating window functions as a
>  >>> category fundamentally separate from plain functions --- that is,
>  >>> we are not following the "aggregate" model of having separate
>  >>> commands for aggregate functions.
>
>  >> I hadn't seen any such a consensus.
>
>  Tom> We do not have CREATE WINDOW FUNCTION, DROP WINDOW FUNCTION,
>  Tom> ALTER WINDOW FUNCTION, etc.  If psql uses \dw it will be
>  Tom> presenting a different world view than exists at the SQL level.
>
> I'm not sure why that would matter. The fact that it is CREATE
> FUNCTION ... WINDOW rather than CREATE WINDOW FUNCTION doesn't mean
> that window functions aren't a distinctly different animal to normal
> functions. The usage and syntax is different enough that putting them
> all together under \df seems forced.

Yeah, but all the window functions are stored in pg_proc.

Regards,

--
Hitoshi Harada