Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
> > Revised patch attached. \dw does not need an 'S' decorator,
>
> Yes it does. We have only painfully gotten to the point of having
> consistent behavior across all the \d commands. We are not going
> to break that consistency before it's even shipped.
>
> 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. So it's not apparent to me that a separate \dw
> command is a good solution to start with.
Yea, I thought we were going to do this:
> > Please find enclosed one way to handle it, this being prepending
> > WINDOW to the result types in \df.
but I don't see this behavior in CVS.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
