I wrote:
> I'm fairly sure that in the past we've considered this idea and rejected
> it, mainly on the grounds that it's a completely gratuitous departure
> from SQL standard.
After some more digging I found the thread that (I think) the "mere
pedantry" comment was referring to:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/Pine.LNX.4.44.0604131644260.20730-100000%40lnfm1.sai.msu.ru
There's other nearby discussion at
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/4476BABD.4080100%40zigo.dhs.org
(note that that's referring to the klugy state of affairs before 108fe4730)
Of course, that's just a couple of offhand email threads, which should
not be mistaken for graven stone tablets. But I still don't see much
advantage in deviating from the SQL-standard syntax for COUNT(*).
regards, tom lane
