Re: WIP Patch for GROUPING SETS phase 1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Gierth
Subject Re: WIP Patch for GROUPING SETS phase 1
Date
Msg-id 87fvgoo80r.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP Patch for GROUPING SETS phase 1  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
>>>>> "Alvaro" == Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> (This of course means that if someone has a cube() function call>> in a group by clause of a view, then upgrading
willchange the>> meaning of the view and possibly fail to create it; there seems to>> be no fix for this, not even
usingthe latest pg_dump, since>> pg_dump relies on the old server's ruleutils)
 
Alvaro> This sucks.  Can we tweak pg_dump to check for presence ofAlvaro> the cube extension, and if found refuse to
dumpunless aAlvaro> minor version older than some hardcoded version (known toAlvaro> have fixed ruleutils) is used?
 

I honestly don't think it's worth it. cube() is not a function that
really makes any sense in a GROUP BY, though of course someone could
have written their own function called cube() that does something
else; while this case is a problem, it is also likely to be
vanishingly rare.

-- 
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal to add a QNX 6.5 port to PostgreSQL
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API