Re: Review: listagg aggregate
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Scott Bailey <artacus@comcast.net>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Hackers" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-01-25T14:56:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- string_agg.diff (application/octet-stream) patch
2010/1/25 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes: >> 2010/1/25 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>: >>> xmlagg -> concatenates values to form xml datum >>> array_agg -> concatenates values to form array datum >>> ??? -> concatenates values to form string datum >>> >>> So it's pretty clear that listagg does not fit into this scheme. > >> when you define list as text domain, then this the name is correct. > > IOW, if you define away the problem then there's no problem? > > I agree that "list" is a terrible choice of name here. "string_agg" > seemed reasonable and in keeping with the standardized "array_agg". actualised patch - the name is string_agg regards Pavel Stehule > > regards, tom lane >