Re: weird GROUPING SETS and ORDER BY behaviour

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 at 18:34, Zhang Mingli <zmlpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 6, 2024 at 01:38 +0800, Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin@geoff.dj>, wrote:
>
>
> Am I missing some reason why the first set isn't sorted as I'd hoped?
>
>
> Woo, it’s a complex order by, I try to understand your example.
> And I think the order is right, what’s your expected order result?

I was hoping to see

gp_n | gp_conc | n | concat
------+---------+------+--------
 1 | 0 | NULL | n1x5
 1 | 0 | NULL | n2x4
 1 | 0 | NULL | n3x3
 1 | 0 | NULL | n4x2
 1 | 0 | NULL | n5x1
 0 | 1 | n1 | NULL
 0 | 1 | n2 | NULL
 0 | 1 | n3 | NULL
 0 | 1 | n4 | NULL
 0 | 1 | n5 | NULL

because when gp_conc is 0, it should be ordering by the concat() value.