On fre, 2009-08-21 at 20:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> As of SQL99 it's supposed to be legal if you're grouping by a primary key
> (or some other cases where the other columns can be proved functionally
> dependent on the grouping columns, but that's the most useful one).
> We haven't got round to im
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> Jean-Michel Pouré wrote:
>> Why can't PostgreSQL add the required field automatically? Could this be
>> added to PostgreSQL to-do-list?
> Isn't that contrary to the standard?
As of SQL99 it's supposed to be legal if you're grouping by a primary key
(or some other cases w
Greg Stark wrote:
If Postgres changed on this front it would be to support the SQL
Standard concept of "functional dependency". In cases where some
columns are guaranteed to be unique you can leave them out of the
GROUP BY but still use them in the select list. This isn't MySQL's
behaviour of j
On Friday 21 August 2009 04:01:36 pm Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Jean-Michel Pouré wrote:
> >> BTW, why don't we have a multi-argument version of CONCAT()? In 8.4,
> >> it
> >> would be possible ... I should add it to mysqlcompat library.
> >
> > yes. In PostgreSQL core ...
>
> No. That is exactly wh
Greg Stark writes:
> The first step is probably to do the opposite of what we're talking
> about here: cases where people *have* added extra columns to the GROUP
> BY key so they can use those columns in their select list. We can
> remove those columns from the sort or hash comparison key if there
2009/8/22 Stephen Frost :
>> This is a bit trickier than it looks because it makes the validity of a
>> query dependent on the existence of an appropriate uniqueness
>> constraint; thus for example DROP CONSTRAINT might invalidate a stored
>> rule or view. See prior discussions.
>
> Ah, yes. Coul
* Greg Stark (gsst...@mit.edu) wrote:
> So not many uses of it in MySQL actually *would* be valid if we
> implemented the shortcut. But MySQL doesn't enforce that so it serves
> that purpose as well as what we get out of DISTINCT ON.
That's probably a good thing- if they're valid then we'd probabl
2009/8/22 Stephen Frost :
> * Greg Stark (gsst...@mit.edu) wrote:
>> You would have to specify the key. I think typically you would have
>> something like:
>>
>> SELECT a.*, sum(b.col)
>> FROM a,b
>> GROUP BY a.pk
>
> Ahhh, ok, this makes more sense. This is SQL standard?
Incidentally it make
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > Right. It strikes me as a relativly small amount of work to get the
> > initial "just add the columns to the group by" logic implemented.
>
> Well, no, you *aren't* adding the columns to the GROUP BY. You're just
> not throwing
Stephen Frost writes:
> Right. It strikes me as a relativly small amount of work to get the
> initial "just add the columns to the group by" logic implemented.
Well, no, you *aren't* adding the columns to the GROUP BY. You're just
not throwing the error. You really don't want to add redundant
* Greg Stark (gsst...@mit.edu) wrote:
> You would have to specify the key. I think typically you would have
> something like:
>
> SELECT a.*, sum(b.col)
>FROM a,b
> GROUP BY a.pk
Ahhh, ok, this makes more sense. This is SQL standard? Do we have a
TODO for it?
> The database knows that it
2009/8/22 Stephen Frost :
> Hrmm. That sounds kinda neat, but you'd still have to specify one of
> the columns in the GROUP BY, I presume? Or could you just say 'GROUP
> BY' without any columns, and have it GROUP BY the key of the table
> you're using?
You would have to specify the key. I think
* Greg Stark (gsst...@mit.edu) wrote:
> select distinct on (a) a,b,c from a ORDER BY a,b,c
>
> But Postgres insists you have an ORDER BY which has to agree with the
> DISTINCT ON columns and provide some extra column(s) to determine
> which values of b,c are chosen.
Not quite technically correct.
2009/8/21 Jean-Michel Pouré :
> PostgreSQL requires all non-aggregated fields to be present in the GROUP
> BY clause (I fixed 10 such issues in Drupal code).
> http://drupal.org/node/30
>
> Why can't PostgreSQL add the required field automatically? Could this be
> added to PostgreSQL to-do-list
Jean-Michel Pouré wrote:
BTW, why don't we have a multi-argument version of CONCAT()? In 8.4,
it
would be possible ... I should add it to mysqlcompat library.
yes. In PostgreSQL core ...
No. That is exactly where it shouldn't go. And frankly, Drupal
developers should stop writ
On 8/21/09 3:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 04:19:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Josh Berkus writes:
BTW, why don't we have a multi-argument version of CONCAT()?
>>> Why wouldn't people use the SQL-standard || operator instead?
>
>> Because by defa
David Fetter writes:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 04:19:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Josh Berkus writes:
>>> BTW, why don't we have a multi-argument version of CONCAT()?
>>
>> Why wouldn't people use the SQL-standard || operator instead?
> Because by default, MySQL uses that as, get this, "logic
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 04:19:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes:
> > BTW, why don't we have a multi-argument version of CONCAT()?
>
> Why wouldn't people use the SQL-standard || operator instead?
Because by default, MySQL uses that as, get this, "logical OR."
Cheers,
David (grate
> I've registered for the Drupal site so that I can fix and/or expand
> some
> of your items.
Thanks. I corrected the index on dual fields page.
> If you want to discuss Drupal & PostgreSQL again, please post on the
> pgsql-advocacy list or the pgsql-php mailing lists. pgsql-hackers
> isn't
> th
Josh Berkus writes:
> BTW, why don't we have a multi-argument version of CONCAT()?
Why wouldn't people use the SQL-standard || operator instead?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Jean-Michel,
Thank you for doing this!
I've registered for the Drupal site so that I can fix and/or expand some
of your items.
People who know Drupal better than me should add to them.
If you want to discuss Drupal & PostgreSQL again, please post on the
pgsql-advocacy list or the pgsql-php mail
2009/8/21 Jean-Michel Pouré :
> Dear friends,
>
> I have been using PostgreSQL since 6.3 releases and I am a real fan.
> Of course, I never use nor trust MySQL to deliver data.
>
> Now I use Drupal 6.3 with PostgreSQL 8.4.
>
> I loose a lot of time correcting Drupal SQL.
> You may be interested in
Greg Stark wrote:
2009/8/21 Andrew Dunstan :
Since you haven't shown us what page this refers to, I at least am totally
in the dark about what is being discussed.
It was in the original post
http://drupal.org/node/14
Darn. Our mail system sucks badly. For some insane reaso
2009/8/21 Andrew Dunstan :
>
> Since you haven't shown us what page this refers to, I at least am totally
> in the dark about what is being discussed.
It was in the original post
http://drupal.org/node/14
--
greg
http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (p
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
This page gathers most frequent problems that Drupal users and
developers encounter when using PostgreSQL.
I would be delighted to have your feedback.
Could some issues reasonably be fixed for a better Drupal support?
Well I doubt we would do anything to copy MySQ
On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 12:50 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I show multi-value INSERT was added in PG 8.2, not 8.4, * Add
> support for multiple-row VALUES clauses, per SQL standard (Joe, Tom),
> http://drupal.org/node/68.
>
> I am confused because I thought Drupal worked with Postgres, bu
Jean-Michel Pour? wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> Dear friends,
>
> I have been using PostgreSQL since 6.3 releases and I am a real fan.
> Of course, I never use nor trust MySQL to deliver data.
>
> Now I use Drupal 6.3 with PostgreSQL 8.4.
>
> I loose a lot of time correcting Drupal
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 18:22:41 +0200
Jean-Michel Pouré wrote:
> I gathered some real examples here: Guidelines for writing MySQL and
> PostgreSQL compliant SQL => http://drupal.org/node/14
>
> This page gathers most frequent problems that Drupal users and
> developers encounter when using Postg
> This page gathers most frequent problems that Drupal users and
> developers encounter when using PostgreSQL.
>
> I would be delighted to have your feedback.
> Could some issues reasonably be fixed for a better Drupal support?
Well I doubt we would do anything to copy MySQL. However Drupal has
Dear friends,
I have been using PostgreSQL since 6.3 releases and I am a real fan.
Of course, I never use nor trust MySQL to deliver data.
Now I use Drupal 6.3 with PostgreSQL 8.4.
I loose a lot of time correcting Drupal SQL.
You may be interested in my developer feedback.
I gathered some rea
30 matches
Mail list logo
