Horton

Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL

David Christensen <david@pgguru.net>

View thread
From: David Christensen <david@pgguru.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>
Date: 2025-09-29T21:13:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Add GROUP BY ALL.

  2. Refactor to avoid code duplication in transformPLAssignStmt.

  3. Fix missed copying of groupDistinct in transformPLAssignStmt.

> On Sep 29, 2025, at 3:58 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> 
> David Christensen <david@pgguru.net> writes:
>>> Here is v7 with a stab at docs; fairly minimal at this point, but
>>> touching the two areas that are likely to need adjusting.
> 
> I did some more word-smithing on the docs and pushed it.
> 
>>> When
>>> adjusting the docs for sql-select, I noticed that the grammar also
>>> supports `GROUP BY ALL <grouping_elements>`, so I also added a test to
>>> ensure that this syntax is explicitly supported.
> 
> +1, can't hurt.
> 
>>> (It seems like it
>>> works as-is without further grammar adjustments, but I was a little
>>> worried when I first saw that fact... :D)
> 
> Bison would have been vocal about it if you'd introduced any
> ambiguity.  Still, I didn't feel like looking around to see if we
> already covered this syntax, and I agree it's close enough to being
> an issue to be worth covering.
> 
> Thanks for the patch!

Great, thank you!

David