Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Christensen <david@pgguru.net>
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: 2025-09-29T20:58:37Z
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 →
-
Add GROUP BY ALL.
- ef38a4d9756d 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Refactor to avoid code duplication in transformPLAssignStmt.
- b0fb2c6aa5a4 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Fix missed copying of groupDistinct in transformPLAssignStmt.
- b7f6798c056a 16.11 landed
- 9ca79896aba3 15.15 landed
- 78a284b0b8d4 18.1 landed
- 7504d2be9eb4 19 (unreleased) landed
- 3fc9aa5b0233 17.7 landed
- 0be39b4b1a01 14.20 landed
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! regards, tom lane