Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP
Date
Msg-id 8764zu7psr.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP  (Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP  (Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to> writes:

> If someone did a naive implementation of first() and last() aggregates
> for 8.1, is that something that would likely be accepted?

You mean like this?
CREATE FUNCTION first_accum(anyelement,anyelement) RETURNS anyelement as 'select coalesce($1,$2)' LANGUAGE SQL;CREATE
AGGREGATEfirst (BASETYPE=anyelement, SFUNC=first_accum, STYPE = anyelement);
 

Though I suspect it would be faster as a native C implementation.


-- 
greg



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Qingqing Zhou"
Date:
Subject: signed short fd
Next
From: Bruno Wolff III
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP