Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP

Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to> writes:
> If someone did a naive implementation of first() and last() aggregates
> for 8.1, is that something that would likely be accepted?

For the purpose that Greg is suggesting, these would have no advantage
over min() or max() --- since the system wouldn't know how to optimize
them --- and they'd be considerably less standard.  So my inclination
would be to say it's a waste of effort.
        regards, tom lane