From owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org Sat Jul 10 16:31:14 1999
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id QAA03701
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:31:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$ Revision: 1.18 $) with ESMTP id QAA10295 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:29:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA13874;
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:23:11 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org)
Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:21:15 +0000 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA13331
for pgsql-sql-outgoing; Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:21:14 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hub.org: majordom set sender to owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org using -f
Received: from ra.sai.msu.su (ra.sai.msu.su [158.250.29.2])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA13055;
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:16:42 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from oleg@sai.msu.su)
Received: from ra (ra [158.250.29.2])
by ra.sai.msu.su (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA06017;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 00:16:40 +0400 (MSD)
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 00:16:39 +0400 (MSD)
From: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
X-Sender: megera@ra
Reply-To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
To: hackers@postgreSQL.org
cc: pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: [SQL] SELECT DISTINCT question
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.SK.990711000908.2043R-100000@ra>
Organization: Sternberg Astronomical Institute (Moscow University)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
I got a problem with query:
select distinct (date), bytes from access_log;
which works but not as I expect. I thought this query will select
all rows with distinct values of 'date' column, but it get
distinct pairs 'date, bytes' . From documnetation I see
"DISTINCT will eliminate all duplicate rows from the selection.
DISTINCT ON column will eliminate all duplicates in the specified column;
this is equivalent to using GROUP BY column.
ALL will return all candidate rows, including duplicates."
discovery=> select distinct on date,bytes from access_log;
ERROR: parser: parse error at or near ","
Regards,
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
From owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org Sat Jul 10 18:01:17 1999
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id SAA04878
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 10 Jul 1999 18:01:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$ Revision: 1.18 $) with ESMTP id RAA12755 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:35:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA24997;
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:28:17 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org)
Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:23:39 +0000 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA24524
for pgsql-sql-outgoing; Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:23:38 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hub.org: majordom set sender to owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org using -f
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2] (may be forged))
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA24227;
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:19:43 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA05709;
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:18:28 -0400 (EDT)
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 11 Jul 1999 00:16:39 +0400 (MSD)
<Pine.GSO.3.96.SK.990711000908.2043R-100000@ra>
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:18:28 -0400
Message-ID: <5707.931641508@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sender: owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
> discovery=> select distinct on date,bytes from access_log;
> ERROR: parser: parse error at or near ","
The syntax for SELECT DISTINCT ON is just as brain-damaged as the
functionality itself: there's no comma after the column name.
You want
select distinct on date date,bytes from access_log;
The reason the functionality is brain-damaged is that there's no way to
know which tuple out of the set of tuples with a given "date" value will
be the one returned.
SELECT DISTINCT ON is not in SQL92, and I think it shouldn't be in
Postgres either...
regards, tom lane
From owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org Sun Jul 11 12:01:23 1999
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id MAA26263
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:01:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$ Revision: 1.18 $) with ESMTP id LAA14891 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:56:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA09165;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:51:27 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org)
Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:49:46 +0000 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA08263
for pgsql-sql-outgoing; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:49:45 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hub.org: majordom set sender to owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org using -f
Received: from trends.net (root@clio.trends.ca [209.47.148.2])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA05079;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:41:38 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from oleg@sai.msu.su)
Received: from ra.sai.msu.su (ra.sai.msu.su [158.250.29.2])
by trends.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA21557;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 02:23:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ra (ra [158.250.29.2])
by ra.sai.msu.su (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA18412;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 10:09:24 +0400 (MSD)
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 10:09:24 +0400 (MSD)
From: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
X-Sender: megera@ra
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
In-Reply-To: <5707.931641508@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.SK.990711100405.2043V-100000@ra>
Organization: Sternberg Astronomical Institute (Moscow University)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
On Sat, 10 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:18:28 -0400
> From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
> Cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
> Subject: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
>
> Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
> > discovery=> select distinct on date,bytes from access_log;
> > ERROR: parser: parse error at or near ","
>
> The syntax for SELECT DISTINCT ON is just as brain-damaged as the
> functionality itself: there's no comma after the column name.
> You want
>
> select distinct on date date,bytes from access_log;
>
thanks, this works. But why parser complains about such query:
discovery=> select distinct on a.date a.date, a.bytes from access_log a;
ERROR: parser: parse error at or near "."
In this query I could just omit '.', but in more complex query
I probably could need one.
> The reason the functionality is brain-damaged is that there's no way to
> know which tuple out of the set of tuples with a given "date" value will
> be the one returned.
>
> SELECT DISTINCT ON is not in SQL92, and I think it shouldn't be in
> Postgres either...
I'm not an SQL expert, but if it works and this feature is in standard
but only syntax is diffrent, why just not to use standard
select distinct(date), bytes from access_log;
Or I'm missing here ?
Regards,
Oleg
>
> regards, tom lane
>
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
From owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org Sun Jul 11 12:01:26 1999
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id MAA26269
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:01:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$ Revision: 1.18 $) with ESMTP id LAA15017 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:59:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA09118;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:51:21 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org)
Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:49:44 +0000 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA06345
for pgsql-hackers-outgoing; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:46:14 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hub.org: majordom set sender to owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org using -f
Received: from trends.net (root@clio.trends.ca [209.47.148.2])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA05079;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:41:38 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from oleg@sai.msu.su)
Received: from ra.sai.msu.su (ra.sai.msu.su [158.250.29.2])
by trends.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA21557;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 02:23:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ra (ra [158.250.29.2])
by ra.sai.msu.su (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA18412;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 10:09:24 +0400 (MSD)
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 10:09:24 +0400 (MSD)
From: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
X-Sender: megera@ra
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
In-Reply-To: <5707.931641508@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.SK.990711100405.2043V-100000@ra>
Organization: Sternberg Astronomical Institute (Moscow University)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
On Sat, 10 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:18:28 -0400
> From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
> Cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
> Subject: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
>
> Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
> > discovery=> select distinct on date,bytes from access_log;
> > ERROR: parser: parse error at or near ","
>
> The syntax for SELECT DISTINCT ON is just as brain-damaged as the
> functionality itself: there's no comma after the column name.
> You want
>
> select distinct on date date,bytes from access_log;
>
thanks, this works. But why parser complains about such query:
discovery=> select distinct on a.date a.date, a.bytes from access_log a;
ERROR: parser: parse error at or near "."
In this query I could just omit '.', but in more complex query
I probably could need one.
> The reason the functionality is brain-damaged is that there's no way to
> know which tuple out of the set of tuples with a given "date" value will
> be the one returned.
>
> SELECT DISTINCT ON is not in SQL92, and I think it shouldn't be in
> Postgres either...
I'm not an SQL expert, but if it works and this feature is in standard
but only syntax is diffrent, why just not to use standard
select distinct(date), bytes from access_log;
Or I'm missing here ?
Regards,
Oleg
>
> regards, tom lane
>
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
From owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org Sun Jul 11 12:01:16 1999
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id MAA26248
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:01:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$ Revision: 1.18 $) with ESMTP id LAA14635 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:52:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA07748;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:47:08 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org)
Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:44:34 +0000 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA05445
for pgsql-sql-outgoing; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:44:33 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hub.org: majordom set sender to owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org using -f
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2] (may be forged))
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA04477;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:40:31 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15131;
Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:38:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 11 Jul 1999 10:09:24 +0400 (MSD)
<Pine.GSO.3.96.SK.990711100405.2043V-100000@ra>
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:38:43 -0400
Message-ID: <15129.931707523@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sender: owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
> thanks, this works. But why parser complains about such query:
> discovery=> select distinct on a.date a.date, a.bytes from access_log a;
> ERROR: parser: parse error at or near "."
Probably the grammar specifies just <column name> and not anything
more complex after DISTINCT ON. It'd be risky to try to accept a
general expression after ON, due to the silly decision to leave out
any terminating punctuation.
>> SELECT DISTINCT ON is not in SQL92, and I think it shouldn't be in
>> Postgres either...
> I'm not an SQL expert, but if it works and this feature is in standard
> but only syntax is diffrent,
No, there is no feature in SQL that allows DISTINCT on a subset of
columns, period. This is not merely a matter of syntax, it's a
fundamental semantic issue.
> why just not to use standard
>
> select distinct(date), bytes from access_log;
>
> Or I'm missing here ?
I don't think that does what you expect it to (hint: the
parentheses are redundant).
regards, tom lane
From owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org Tue Jul 13 18:02:01 1999
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id SAA07953
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:02:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$ Revision: 1.18 $) with ESMTP id RAA14528 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:46:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hub.org (hub.org [209.167.229.1])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA96029;
Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:42:37 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@hub.org)
Received: by hub.org (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09 00:29:32)); Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:33:35 +0000 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA94598
for pgsql-sql-outgoing; Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:33:33 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hub.org: majordom set sender to owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org using -f
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2])
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA94565;
Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:33:19 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA24415;
Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:31:49 -0400 (EDT)
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee>
cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 13 Jul 1999 23:50:57 +0300
<378BA6B1.2B226DDB@trust.ee>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:31:48 -0400
Message-ID: <24413.931901508@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sender: owner-pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Precedence: bulk
Status: ROr
Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee> writes:
>> "DISTINCT will eliminate all duplicate rows from the selection.
>> DISTINCT ON column will eliminate all duplicates in the specified column;
>> this is equivalent to using GROUP BY column."
> If it is equivalent to GROUP BY then it should allow only aggregates
> in non-distinct columns, like:
> select distinct on date date, sum(bytes) from access_log;
> If it does not, then it should be files as a bug imho.
It does not. Whether that is a bug is hard to say, since there is no
standard I know of that says what it *is* supposed to do.
If you look at the select_distinct_on regress test outputs, I bet you
will be even less happy:
QUERY: SELECT DISTINCT ON string4 two, string4, ten
FROM tmp
ORDER BY two using <, string4 using <, ten using <;
two|string4|ten
---+-------+---
0|AAAAxx | 0
0|HHHHxx | 0
0|OOOOxx | 0
0|VVVVxx | 0
1|AAAAxx | 1
1|HHHHxx | 1
1|OOOOxx | 1
1|VVVVxx | 1
(8 rows)
That's not exactly my idea of "distinct" values of string4 ---
but apparently whoever made up the regress test thought it was OK!
Can anyone defend this feature or provide a coherent definition
of what it's supposed to be doing? My urge to rip it out is
growing stronger and stronger...
regards, tom lane
From tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us Thu Sep 23 17:27:49 1999
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id RAA25975
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 23 Sep 1999 17:27:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by sss.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA15769;
Thu, 23 Sep 1999 17:27:38 -0400 (EDT)
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
cc: Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee>, hackers@postgreSQL.org,
pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Re: [HACKERS] SELECT DISTINCT question
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 23 Sep 1999 13:18:18 -0400 (EDT)
<199909231718.NAA19629@candle.pha.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 17:27:37 -0400
Message-ID: <15767.938122057@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Status: ROr
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom, any status on this DISTINCT ON ripout?
I haven't done anything about it, if that's what you mean.
I didn't get any indication of whether anyone else agreed with me
(maybe the lack of loud complaints should be taken as consent?)
regards, tom lane