Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Christensen
Subject Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
Date
Msg-id CAHM0NXib3ZpAkPypXS6coGrydWadp8NXHvSinOcGF+uOHJs+hQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 9:12 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
> > The initially proposed patch appears to have the right idea overall.
> > But it does not handle more complex cases like
> >      SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY ALL;
>
> > (For explanation:  GROUP BY ALL expands to all select list entries that
> > do not contain aggregates.  So the above would expand to
> >      SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY a;
> > which should then be rejected based on the existing rules.)
>
> I thought I understood this definition, up till your last
> comment.  What's invalid about that expanded query?
>
> regression=# create table t1 (a int, b int);
> CREATE TABLE
> regression=# SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY a;
>  a | ?column?
> ---+----------
> (0 rows)

Agreed that this shouldn't be an error; added a similar test case to
v2 of this patch.

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jacob Champion
Date:
Subject: Re: test_json_parser/002_inline is kind of slow
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL