Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
David Christensen <david@pgguru.net>
From: David Christensen <david@pgguru.net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>,
Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>
Date: 2025-09-26T15:59:26Z
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
On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 10:54 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote: > > On 26.09.25 16:11, Tom Lane wrote: > > Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes: > >> The initially proposed patch appears to have the right idea overall. > >> But it does not handle more complex cases like > >> SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY ALL; > > > >> (For explanation: GROUP BY ALL expands to all select list entries that > >> do not contain aggregates. So the above would expand to > >> SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY a; > >> which should then be rejected based on the existing rules.) > > > > I thought I understood this definition, up till your last > > comment. What's invalid about that expanded query? > > > > regression=# create table t1 (a int, b int); > > CREATE TABLE > > regression=# SELECT a, SUM(b)+a FROM t1 GROUP BY a; > > a | ?column? > > ---+---------- > > (0 rows) > > This was a sloppy example. Here is a better one: > > create table t1 (a int, b int, c int); > > select a, sum(b)+c from t1 group by all; > > This is equivalent to > > select a, sum(b)+c from t1 group by a; > > which would be rejected as > > ERROR: column "t1.c" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used > in an aggregate function Verified that with v2 that this is what happens in this case; will include this and whatever other feedback there is in a v3.