On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 at 21:34, PG Doc comments form <[email protected]> wrote: > > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/tutorial-agg.html > Description: > > Where it says "In the previous example, we can apply the city name > restriction in WHERE, since it needs no aggregate.", > should say "In the previous example, we apply the city name restriction in > WHERE since it needs no aggregate." > which I find to be more correct.
i.e you want to remove the word "can" and remove a comma. I disagree with this being an improvement. The text is trying to convey that it's more efficient to put the "city" qual in the WHERE clause, even though it technically *could* go in the HAVING clause. If you remove "can" then that makes it sound more like putting it in the HAVING clause is invalid. It's not. The text explains it's just more efficient to filter before grouping. David
