Horton

Re: Proposal: QUALIFY clause

Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>

View thread
From: Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97@gmail.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Date: 2025-07-22T15:24:24Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 22/07/2025 17:14, Nico Williams wrote:
> It doesn't seem too crazy that extra WHEREs in WHERE clauses should some
> day function as ANDs, and ditto HAVINGs, which is another reason not to
> reuse HAVING for this: just to leave that a possibility, remote though
> it might be.


I have a firm finger on the pulse of the standards committee, and I can 
guarantee that multiple WHERE clauses will never replace AND until 
certain people cross the river Styx.  Myself included.


> My advice is to wait till QUALIFY is standardized, then hold your nose
> and adopt it, or maybe sooner when it becomes clear that it will be
> standardized (because so many other RDBMSes have it too).


Good advice.

-- 

Vik Fearing