Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4639.1229881409@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name? ("Hitoshi Harada" <umi.tanuki@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Hitoshi Harada" <umi.tanuki@gmail.com> writes: > 2008/12/21 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: >>> WindowAgg? >> >> WindowAgg seems like a winner to me, because it draws a parallel to >> the regular Agg node type, which seems valid unless I've completely >> misunderstood what's happening... > I disagree with WindowAgg. The aggregates are subset of window > functions in the node, though much code is similar and ported from > nodeAgg. So? If Agg does a subset of what WindowAgg does, all the more reason to use that name. > The spec introduces its concept as "Windowed Table". So I'd suggest > "WindowedTable" or "WindowTable". Or "Windowed" if shortened. I don't care for this proposal. Most of the plan node types are named after verbs denoting their actions ("scan", "sort", etc --- note that "aggregate" can be a verb in English, and I think the verb sense is what the Agg(regate) node is named for). Choosing a name that's a noun doesn't fit in. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: