Re: Review: listagg aggregate
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Review: listagg aggregate |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 603c8f071001280553w30eb9daeua8e1b8aca7704d8a@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Review: listagg aggregate (Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Review: listagg aggregate
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:59 AM, Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 2010/1/28 Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>: >> > 2010/1/28 David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com>: >> >> On Jan 27, 2010, at 6:47 PM, Takahiro Itagaki wrote: >> >> >> >>> * I think we cannot cache the delimiter at the first call. >> >>> For example, >> >>> SELECT string_agg(elem, delim) >> >>> FROM (VALUES('A', ','), ('B', '+'), ('C', '*')) t(elem, delim); >> >>> should return 'A+B*C' rather than 'A,B,C'. >> > >> > no, has not. >> What is use case for this behave?? > > I also think this usage is nonsense, but seems to be the most consistent > behavior for me. I didn't say anything about use-cases, but just capability. > Since we allow such kinds of usage for now, you need to verify the > delimiter is not changed rather than ignoring it if you want disallow > to change the delimiter during an aggregation. > > Of course you can cache the first delimiter at start, and check delimiters > are not changed every calls -- but I think it is just a waste of cpu cycle. Agreed. Not caching it seems the simplest solution. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: