On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 07:40, Arne Roland wrote:
> can someone point out to me, why we don't consider pushdowns of the joinqual
> for these queries beyond the distinct on?
>
> When the qual matches the distinct clause, it should be possible to generate
> both parametrized and non parametrized
Hi,
can someone point out to me, why we don't consider pushdowns of the joinqual
for these queries beyond the distinct on?
When the qual matches the distinct clause, it should be possible to generate
both parametrized and non parametrized subplans for the same query. The same
should hold
sorting the top-level List by the number of
elements each of the contained IntLists, the NIL was always at the
start of the top-level List.
It wasn't too hard to modify the test to change that.
I wonder if the testing for the feature is just a bit too light.
Would it maybe be worth adding a GROUP
On 3/19/21 12:52 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On 3/19/21 12:26 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> This is gcc 4.5, but hopefully whatever shuts it up will also work on 4.7.
>>> I'll work on figuring that out.
>>
>> Actually, the problem is pretty obvious after comparing this use
>> of
On 3/19/21 12:26 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> This is gcc 4.5, but hopefully whatever shuts it up will also work on 4.7.
>> I'll work on figuring that out.
>
> Actually, the problem is pretty obvious after comparing this use
> of foreach_delete_current() to every other one. I'm not sure
I wrote:
> This is gcc 4.5, but hopefully whatever shuts it up will also work on 4.7.
> I'll work on figuring that out.
Actually, the problem is pretty obvious after comparing this use
of foreach_delete_current() to every other one. I'm not sure why
the compiler warnings are phrased just as they
I wrote:
> Hmm ... prairiedog isn't showing the warning, but maybe gaur will.
Bingo:
parse_agg.c: In function 'expand_grouping_sets':
parse_agg.c:1851:5: warning: value computed is not used
This is gcc 4.5, but hopefully whatever shuts it up will also work on 4.7.
I'll work on figuring that
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 10:14 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> Thanks for the info. So it's likely related to older gcc releases. The
>> question is how to tweak the code to get rid of this ...
> It's frustrating to have to do press-ups to fix a problem because a
> zombie
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 10:14 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> >> The only possibility I can think of is some sort of issue in the old-ish
> >> gcc release (4.7.2).
> >
> > No sure what's going on there, but data points: I tried a 32 bit build
> > here (that's the other special thing about lapwing) and
On 3/18/21 10:02 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 8:27 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> Hmmm, this seems to fail on lapwing with this error:
>>
>> parse_agg.c: In function 'expand_grouping_sets':
>> parse_agg.c:1851:23: error: value computed is not used
>> [-Werror=unused-value]
>>
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 8:27 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Hmmm, this seems to fail on lapwing with this error:
>
> parse_agg.c: In function 'expand_grouping_sets':
> parse_agg.c:1851:23: error: value computed is not used
> [-Werror=unused-value]
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> That
On 3/18/21 6:25 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 3/16/21 3:52 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/16/21 9:21 AM, Vik Fearing wrote:
>>> On 3/13/21 12:33 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Hi Vik,
The patch seems quite ready, I have just two comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks for taking a look.
>>>
On 3/16/21 3:52 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>
> On 3/16/21 9:21 AM, Vik Fearing wrote:
>> On 3/13/21 12:33 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>> Hi Vik,
>>>
>>> The patch seems quite ready, I have just two comments.
>>
>> Thanks for taking a look.
>>
>>> 1) Shouldn't this add another for DISTINCT,
On 3/16/21 9:21 AM, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 3/13/21 12:33 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Hi Vik,
>>
>> The patch seems quite ready, I have just two comments.
>
> Thanks for taking a look.
>
>> 1) Shouldn't this add another for DISTINCT, somewhere in the
>> documentation? Now the index points
56525ce05e00b74081b8c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vik Fearing
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 10:26:57 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] implement GROUP BY DISTINCT
---
doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml | 54 ++
doc/src/sgml/ref/select.sgml | 9 +-
src/backend/catalog/sql_feature
Hi Vik,
The patch seems quite ready, I have just two comments.
1) Shouldn't this add another for DISTINCT, somewhere in the
documentation? Now the index points just to the SELECT DISTINCT part.
2) The part in gram.y that wraps/unwraps the boolean flag as an integer,
in order to stash it in the
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 5:51 PM, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 3/2/21 4:06 PM, Georgios Kokolatos wrote:
>
> > As a minor gripe, I would note the addition of list_int_cmp.
> > The block
> >
> > - /* Sort each groupset individually */
> >
> >
> > -
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: not tested
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Hi,
this is a useful feature, thank you for implementing. I gather that it
p 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vik Fearing
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 10:26:57 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] implement GROUP BY DISTINCT
---
doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml | 41
doc/src/sgml/ref/select.sgml | 9 +-
src/backend/catalog/sql_features.txt | 2 +-
src/ba
s' column).
> This line:
> '+T434GROUP BY DISTINCT YES'
>
> (A tab at the end will do, I suppose; that's how I fixed the patch locally)
Argh. Fixed.
Thank you for looking at it!
--
Vik Fearing
>From d5587ece129fbaf4309ddf48d44b9d0249d9cf56 Mon Sep 1
> On 2021.02.21. 13:52 Vik Fearing wrote:
>
> Attached is a patch to implement this for PostgreSQL.
> []
The changed line that gets stuffed into sql_features is missing a terminal
value (to fill the 'comments' column).
This line:
'+T434 GROUP BY DISTINCT
When combining multiple grouping items, such as rollups and cubes, the
resulting flattened grouping sets can contain duplicate items. The
standard provides for this by allowing GROUP BY DISTINCT to deduplicate
them prior to doing the actual work.
For example:
GROUP BY ROLLUP (a,b), ROLLUP (a,c
22 matches
Mail list logo
