I wrote: > I'm fairly sure that in the past we've considered this idea and rejected > it, mainly on the grounds that it's a completely gratuitous departure > from SQL standard.
After some more digging I found the thread that (I think) the "mere pedantry" comment was referring to: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/Pine.LNX.4.44.0604131644260.20730-100000%40lnfm1.sai.msu.ru There's other nearby discussion at https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/4476BABD.4080100%40zigo.dhs.org (note that that's referring to the klugy state of affairs before 108fe4730) Of course, that's just a couple of offhand email threads, which should not be mistaken for graven stone tablets. But I still don't see much advantage in deviating from the SQL-standard syntax for COUNT(*). regards, tom lane
