David:
>Only now just grasping that you are trying to group something that is
definitionally random. That just doesn't make sense to me.
Oh, sorry for the confusion. Yeah, totally. I didn't mean to draw specific
attention to GROUP BY -- as you've pointed out elsewhere this issue also
exists with
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 2:21 PM Paul George wrote:
> Great, thanks for the links and useful past discussions! I figured I
> wasn't the first to stumble across this, and it's interesting to see the
> issue arise with ORDER BY [VOLATILE FUNC] as well.
>
> My question was not so much about changing
Great, thanks for the links and useful past discussions! I figured I wasn't
the first to stumble across this, and it's interesting to see the issue
arise with ORDER BY [VOLATILE FUNC] as well.
My question was not so much about changing behavior as it was about
understanding what is desired, especi
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 7:20 AM Paul George wrote:
>
> I wanted to surface a discussion in [1] regarding the expected behavior of
> GROUP BY with VOLATILE expressions. There seems to be a discrepancy between
> how volatile functions (RANDOM(), also confirmed with TIMEOFDAY()) and
> subqueries are
