Horton

Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options

Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>

View thread
From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>
To: ojford@gmail.com
Cc: peter@eisentraut.org, li.evan.chao@gmail.com, krasiyan@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, vik@postgresfriends.org, andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk, david@fetter.org, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2025-10-03T01:06:06Z
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. Fix coding style with "else".

  2. Fix multi WinGetFuncArgInFrame/Partition calls with IGNORE NULLS.

  3. Fix Coverity issue reported in commit 2273fa32bce.

  4. Use ereport rather than elog in WinCheckAndInitializeNullTreatment.

  5. Avoid uninitialized-variable warnings from older compilers.

  6. Fix Coverity issues reported in commit 25a30bbd423.

  7. Improve EXPLAIN's display of window functions.

  8. Automatically generate node support functions

> On Thu, 2 Oct 2025, 13:16 Tatsuo Ishii, <ishii@postgresql.org> wrote:
> 
>> > Thank you for the patch. (I noticed int8 is also missing).
>> >
>> > I have looked into the commit 964d01ae90c3 which was made by Peter.  I
>> > have quick read through the discussion to know why uint8/uint16 (and
>> > int8) are missing in gen_node_support.pl. Unfortunately I have no
>> > clear idea why these data types are missing in the script.
>> >
>> > Peter,
>> > Maybe you wanted to limit the data types that are actually used at
>> > that point? If so, probably we should only add uint8 support this time
>> > (uint8 is only needed to implement $Subject for now).  What do you
>> > think?
>>
>> I decided not to include the fix to gen_node_support.pl for now and
>> commit the patch without it. We could revisit it later on.
>>
>> So here is the commit message I would like to propose.
>>
>> For the technical part please look at the message.
>>
>> Non technical part:
>> First of all the author is Oliver (no doubt).  I would like to be
>> listed as a co-author since I wrote the not null cache part.
>>
>> Next is reviewers. Actually the first effor to implement null
>> treatment clause was back to 9.3 era (2013) at least. After that
>> multiple trials to implemnt the feature happend but they had faded
>> away. I think we don't need to include all of those who joined the old
>> discussions as reviewers. So I started to check from the discussion:
>>
>> https://postgr.es/m/flat/CAGMVOdsbtRwE_4+v8zjH1d9xfovDeQAGLkP_B6k69_VoFEgX-A@mail.gmail.com
>> because it's refered to by the commit fest entry.
>>
>> Oliver and others, I love to hear your comment!
> 
> 
> Looks great, so glad this is finally going in.

I have just pushed the patch (plus patches for syntax.sgml and
sql_features.txt. They were missued after I splitted the patch).
Thank you for your effort!
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS K.K.
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp