On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 6:53 PM David Christensen <da...@pgguru.net> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 4:34 PM David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 1:55 PM David Christensen <da...@pgguru.net> wrote: > >> > >> I see that there'd been some chatter but not a lot of discussion about > >> a GROUP BY ALL feature/functionality. There certainly is utility in > >> such a construct IMHO. > >> > >> Still need some docs; just throwing this out there and getting some > >> feedback. > >> > > > > I strongly dislike adding this feature. I'd only consider supporting it if > > it was part of the SQL standard. > > > > Code is written once and read many times. This feature caters to the > > writer, not the reader. And furthermore usage of this is prone to be to > > the writer's detriment as well. > > I'd say this feature (at least for me) caters to the investigator; > someone who is interactively looking at data hence why it would cater > to the writer. Consider acquainting yourself with a large table that > has a large number of annoying-named fields where you want to look at > how different data is correlated or broken-down. Something along the > lines of:
To me this looks like a feature that a data exploration tool may implement instead of being part of the server. It would then provide more statistics about each correlation/column set etc. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat
