Hello,
At Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:45:21 +0530, Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com> wrote in
<CAM2+6=X9QWgbjJrR-dcLXh-RvvpGy=9ENhUOGHzrxhcJ2kVDSQ@mail.gmail.com>
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk
> > wrote:
>
> > >>>>> "Kyotaro" == Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> > writes:
> >
> > Kyotaro> Hello, this looks to be a kind of thinko. The attached patch
> > Kyotaro> fixes it.
> >
> > No, that's still wrong. Just knowing that there is a List is not enough
> > to tell whether to concat it or append it.
Thank you. I've missed the non-grouping-set cases.
> > Jeevan's original patch tries to get around this by making the RowExpr
> > case wrap another List around its result (which is then removed by the
> > concat), but this is the wrong approach too because it breaks nested
> > RowExprs (which isn't valid syntax in the spec, because the spec allows
> > only column references in GROUP BY, not arbitrary expressions, but which
> > we have no reason not to support).
>
> > Attached is the current version of my fix (with Jeevan's regression
> > tests plus one of mine).
> >
>
> Looks good to me.
It also looks for me to work as expected and to be in good shape.
The two foreach loops for T_GroupingSet and T_List became to look
very simiar but they don't seem can be merged in reasonable
shape.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center