Re: [HACKERS] Group By, NULL values and inconsistent behaviour.
Michael J. Maravillo <mmj@philonline.com>
From: "Michael J. Maravillo" <mmj@philonline.com>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Date: 1998-01-26T16:23:04Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Darren King wrote: >> The following is Informix behavior: >> >> > select b,c,sum(a) from t1 group by b,c; >> b c (sum) >> >> x 5 >> z 3 >> >> 2 row(s) retrieved. > >Here is where postgres seems to differ. Seems postgres is missing >an implicit sort so that the grouping is done properly. > >Postgres will return _three_ rows... > >b c (sum) > x 3 > z 3 > x 2 I'm running the current cvs and it gives me this. select b,c,sum(a) from t1 group by b,c; b|c |sum -+--+--- |x | 1 |x | 2 |z | 3 |x | 2 (4 rows) >> > select b,c,sum(a) from t1 group by b,c order by c; >> b c (sum) >> >> x 5 >> z 3 >> >> 2 row(s) retrieved. > >Even with the order by, postgres still returns _three_ rows... > >b c (sum) > x 3 > x 2 > z 3 select b,c,sum(a) from t1 group by b,c order by c; b|c |sum -+--+--- |x | 1 |x | 2 |x | 2 |z | 3 (4 rows) >For now, ignore the patch I sent. Appears from Andreas demo that the >current postgres code will follow the Informix style with regard to >grouping columns with NULL values. Now that I really think about it, >it does make more sense. I think I saw the patch committed this morning...? Mike [ Michael J. Maravillo Philippines Online ] [ System Administrator PGP KeyID: 470AED9D InfoDyne, Incorporated ] [ http://www.philonline.com/~mmj/ (632) 890-0204 ]