4 replaced http://dba.stackexchange.com/ with https://dba.stackexchange.com/
source | link

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that as a result of me being a "SQL Server guy" 11, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that as a result of me being a "SQL Server guy" 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that as a result of me being a "SQL Server guy" 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

3 added 14 characters in body
source | link

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that because I'mas a result of me being a "SQL Server guy" 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that because I'm a SQL Server guy 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that as a result of me being a "SQL Server guy" 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

2 added 7 characters in body
source | link

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that because I'm a SQL Server guy 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a validvalid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that because I'm a SQL Server guy 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

I was the first person who voted-to-close the question.

However, I did not do that because I'm a SQL Server guy 1, and you're not.

I took that action because, in my opinion, the question is not likely to be of any great value to future visitors since it explicitly denies use of the most commonly accepted methods of performing the task in question, without positing a valid reason for excluding those methods.

I cannot mod-close a question since I'm not a moderator - 4 other people also had to agree in order for the question to be closed. The question was open for 57 hours during which time many people(100+ views) had the option of voting up the question, which did not happen, save once, perhaps because "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". Had the community reached the conclusion the question was interesting, well researched, posed a potentially interesting answer, and was worthy of spending time and effort answering, they would have done so.

The close reason, which was obvious to me, was "too localized - this could be because your code has a typo, basic error, or is not relevant to most of our audience. Consider revising your question so that it appeals to a broader audience. As it stands, the question is unlikely to help other users." There are no obvious typos, or basic errors, which leaves, by reason of deduction, only that the question is "not relevant". You could perhaps make the question relevant by adding details so it is relevant; if you did, I might be inclined to vote to re-open it. Perhaps some valid, logical, expedient reason exists for not using the commonly available ROW_NUMBER() aggregate, joining to a numbers table, using ctid, using temp tables, or only doing this in a single statement. Your post still does not deign to answer that, simply because you don't want to.

As for your answers, I fail to understand why using array_agg() or generate_series() is allowed, while row_number() is not.

    Post Undeleted by Max Vernon
    Post Deleted by Max Vernon
1
source | link