2015-12-14 23:09 GMT+01:00 Daniel Verite <dan...@manitou-mail.org>: > Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > postgres=# \crosstabview 4 +month label > > > > Maybe using optional int order column instead label is better - then you > can > > do sort on client side > > > > so the syntax can be "\crosstabview VCol [+/-]HCol [[+-]HOrderCol] > > In the meantime I've followed a different idea: allowing the > vertical header to be sorted too, still server-side. > > That's because to me, the first impulse for a user noticing that > it's not sorted vertically would be to write > \crosstabview +customer month > rather than figure out the > \crosstabview customer +month_number month_name > invocation. > But both ways aren't even mutually exclusive. We could support > \crosstabview [+|-]colV[:labelV] [+|-]colH[:labelH] > it's more complicated to understand, but not harder to implement. > > Also, a non-zero FETCH_COUNT is supported by this version of the patch, > if the first internal FETCH retrieves less than FETCH_COUNT rows. > Otherwise a specific error is emitted. > > Also there are minor changes in arguments and callers following > recent code changes for \o > > Trying to crosstab with 10k+ distinct values vertically, I've noticed > that the current code is too slow, spending too much time > sorting. I'm currently replacing its simple arrays of distinct values > with AVL binary trees, which I expect to be much more efficient for > this. >
I played with last version and it is looking well. I have only one notice, but it is subjective - so can be ignored if you don't like it. The symbol 'X' in two column mode should be centred - now it is aligned to left, what is not nice. For unicode line style I prefer some unicode symbol - your chr(10003) is nice. Regards Pavel > > Best regards, > -- > Daniel Vérité > PostgreSQL-powered mailer: http://www.manitou-mail.org > Twitter: @DanielVerite >
