> On Jun 18, 2026, at 15:54, Fujii Masao <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 12:06 PM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Agreed. BTW, if the check is moved there, it might be better to
>>> change the error message according to the surroundings. The pattern is
>>> "... specified, but %s is not a ..."
>>>
>>> errmsg("OVER specified, but %s is not a window function nor an aggregate
>>> function",
>>>
>>> So the message could be changed to something like:
>>>
>>> errmsg("RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS is specified, but %s is not a window
>>> function"),
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> I've updated the patch accordingly.
>
> I removed "is" from "RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS is specified" to match other
> similar error messages, which use the form "XXX specified, ...".
>
> + if (ignore_nulls != NO_NULLTREATMENT)
> + ereport(ERROR,
> + (errcode(ERRCODE_WRONG_OBJECT_TYPE),
> + errmsg("aggregate functions do not accept RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS"),
> + parser_errposition(pstate, location)));
>
> I also moved this check to the end of the
> "else if (fdresult == FUNCDETAIL_AGGREGATE)" block. That seems like
> a better place, since the ordered-set aggregate checks should happen
> before this check.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Fujii Masao
> <v2-0001-Refine-error-reporting-for-null-treatment-on-non-.patch>
V2 looks good to me.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
