Will Noble created CALCITE-4697:
-----------------------------------
Summary: GROUPING_ID may be distinct from GROUPING
Key: CALCITE-4697
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4697
Project: Calcite
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Will Noble
See [CALCITE-1652|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1652].
I'm having trouble finding the exact text of the SQL Standard 2014, so perhaps
this bug is a dud, but I believe these two agg functions may have different
return values. I think we can all agree on the behavior of the {{GROUPING_ID}}
function, which returns a bitmap where the {{n}}th bit is high iff the {{n}}th
argument is grouped, but according to at least [this
documentation|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DERBY/OLAPGroupingOperation],
the {{GROUPING}} function returns "1 if the values in this row are the results
of aggregating over (possibly) multiple values of that column, and 0 if they
are not". Also note that the author goes on to say "Does the above table make
sense? I'm not sure I'm understanding the GROUPING operation correctly", so
this claim must be verified.
If true, that means these functions are not equivalent because {{GROUPING}}
would return essentially a boolean value whereas {{GROUPING_ID}} would return a
more nuanced integer value, and therefore {{GROUPING_ID}} should not be
deprecated and should not be treated as an alias for {{GROUPING}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
