Re: Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane?
Date
Msg-id 15681.1230327661@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> Lastly, for a simple aggregate used with an OVER clause, the current
> patch seems to define the aggregate as being taken over the frame
> rather than the partition, but I cannot find anything in SQL2008 that
> lends any support to *either* definition.

Never mind that --- I found it in 10.9 syntax rule 4.b.

But what this seems to boil down to is that LEAD() and LAST_VALUE()
are completely useless unless you're allowed to specify a nondefault
framing clause ... and don't mind ignoring the clearly-insane
restriction of 6.10 syntax rule 6.b.

The minimum extra functionality needed to make these functions useful
would seem to be to allow UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING ...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Window-functions patch handling of aggregates
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Tuplestore trimming in window-functions patch