2009/4/11 Andrew Gierth <and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk>: >>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > > >>> Perhaps more to the point: the previous round of discussion about > >>> this already rejected the idea of treating window functions as a > >>> category fundamentally separate from plain functions --- that is, > >>> we are not following the "aggregate" model of having separate > >>> commands for aggregate functions. > > >> I hadn't seen any such a consensus. > > Tom> We do not have CREATE WINDOW FUNCTION, DROP WINDOW FUNCTION, > Tom> ALTER WINDOW FUNCTION, etc. If psql uses \dw it will be > Tom> presenting a different world view than exists at the SQL level. > > I'm not sure why that would matter. The fact that it is CREATE > FUNCTION ... WINDOW rather than CREATE WINDOW FUNCTION doesn't mean > that window functions aren't a distinctly different animal to normal > functions. The usage and syntax is different enough that putting them > all together under \df seems forced.
Yeah, but all the window functions are stored in pg_proc. 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
