Re: description of Aggregate Expressions - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From John Lumby
Subject Re: description of Aggregate Expressions
Date
Msg-id DM6PR06MB55621D8E8B9C786DAA6BA077A35F0@DM6PR06MB5562.namprd06.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: description of Aggregate Expressions  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: description of Aggregate Expressions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-docs
On 12/05/19 18:06, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:18 PM John Lumby <johnlumby@hotmail.com> wrote:
In PostgreSQL 12.1 Documentation chapter 4.2.7. Aggregate Expressions  it says


The syntax of an aggregate expression is one of the following:
  ...
aggregate_name (DISTINCT expression [ , ... ] [ order_by_clause ] ) [ FILTER ( WHERE filter_clause ) ]
...

I believe this is incorrect in the case where the DISTINCT is on a comma-separated list of expressions.
It would imply that this is legal

It is...you didn't get a syntax error.

Hmm,  even though true,  I think this is unhelpful.
If a reference document states that the syntax for a something-or-other construct is  one of the following diagrams,
then I expect that the diagrams are valid for *every* kind of something-or-other,  not just some.
Yet the diagram I quote always results in being rejected in the case of COUNT -
which I consider to be as good as saying it is invalid syntax.


select count(DISTINCT parent_id , name) from  mytable

but that is rejected with
ERROR:  function count(bigint, text) does not exist

The error is that while the query is syntactically correct in order to execute it as written a function would need to exist that does not.  As far as a general syntax diagram goes it has correctly communicated what is legal.

 
whereas

select count(DISTINCT ( parent_id , name) ) from mytable

is accepted.

Correct, converting the two individual columns into a "tuple" allows the default tuple distinct-making infrastructure to be used to execute the query.


So I think to handle all cases the line in the doc should read

aggregate_name (DISTINCT ( expression [ , ... ] ) [ order_by_clause ] ) [ FILTER ( WHERE filter_clause ) ]

I don't know how to indicate that those extra parentheses can be omitted if the list has only one expression.

Then I would have to say the proposed solution to this edge case is worse than the problem.  I also don't expect there to be a clean solution to dealing with the complexities of expressions at the syntax diagram level.

Yes,  I see what I suggested is not ideal either.     But I think something needs to be changed.

How about replacing "expression [ , ... ]"  by "parameter_list" in the description, and then stating that parameter_list can be either a single expression or ,   if the particular aggregate function accepts it (for which,   consult that function's reference),    a comma-separated list of expressions.


David J.



pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: Description of Authentication Methods Supported for Map is Misleading
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: description of Aggregate Expressions