2008/12/30 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Hah, I had missed that fine point. Okay, doc is wrong and I will fix. > > Given that, I think that a suitable minimum implementation should cover > both the RANGE/ROWS distinction and the CURRENT ROW/UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING > distinction, ie I would like 8.4 to support > > RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW > RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING > ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW > ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING > > (1 is the default, 2 and 4 behave the same unless I'm still missing > something.)
My understanding is as well. > Is this something you're interested in working on? I can tackle it > if you don't have time now. > > regards, tom lane > Sorry, over the new year days, I don't have time and will be remote. Maybe from 3th or 4th I can work on this, so if you have time during time I would like you to do it. Otherwise, I will. Regards, -- Hitoshi Harada -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
