Should append
sometimes or always create UNION ALL BY NAME
?
#5165
Labels
needs-discussion
Undecided dilemma
append
sometimes or always create UNION ALL BY NAME
?
#5165
What's up?
Currently a PRQL
append
transform will result inUNION ALL
:gives
However, this results in issues like #4724, #2680, and #3184, where the underlying cause is that
UNION ALL
is interpreted by the database as "unify by column position" rather than "unify by column name". See the DuckDB docs:Questions:
append
always behave asUNION ALL BY NAME
to simplify semantics from the user perspective, and also make the compiler's job easier? This would resolve all of the linked issues above without needing to dive into compiler details, but would be a breaking change for users expecting traditionalUNION ALL
behavior.by:name
orby:position
argument toappend
to allow users to useUNION ALL BY NAME
when that makes sense for their use case?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: