This is an area that the SQL standard didn't think through very clearly
(IMHO). They actually have two ways of specifying functions like this, one
is the ordered aggregate section that this syntax is modeled on, which is
indeed very confusing for multi-parameter aggregates. The other is the
hypot
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > This doesn't seem right to me:
>
> > postgres=# select
> > postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
> > postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
> > string_agg
> >
> > 1234
> > (1 row)
>
On 18 May 2010 16:37, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> This doesn't seem right to me:
>
> postgres=# select
> postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
> postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
> string_agg
>
> 1234
> (1 row)
>
> I'm thinking we should
Stephen Frost writes:
> This doesn't seem right to me:
> postgres=# select
> postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
> postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
> string_agg
>
> 1234
> (1 row)
Looks fine to me: you have two ordering columns (the second r
Greetings,
This doesn't seem right to me:
postgres=# select
postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
string_agg
1234
(1 row)
I'm thinking we should toss a syntax error here and force the 'order
by' to be at th
