Re: WITHIN GROUP patch
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WITHIN GROUP patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6030.1387833639@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WITHIN GROUP patch (Atri Sharma <atri.jiit@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WITHIN GROUP patch
Re: WITHIN GROUP patch |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Atri Sharma <atri.jiit@gmail.com> writes: > Please find attached the latest patch for WITHIN GROUP. This patch is > after fixing the merge conflicts. I've committed this after significant editorialization --- most notably, I pushed control of the sort step into the aggregate support functions. I didn't like the way nodeAgg.c had been hacked up to do it the other way. There's a couple hundred lines of code handling that in orderedsetaggs.c, which is more or less comparable to the amount of code that didn't get added to nodeAgg.c, so I think the argument that the original approach avoided code bloat is bogus. The main reason I pushed all the new aggregates into a single file (orderedsetaggs.c) was so they could share a private typedef for the transition state value. It's possible that we should expose that struct so that third-party aggregate functions could leverage the existing transition-function infrastructure instead of having to copy-and-paste it. I wasn't sure where to put it though --- maybe a new include file would be needed. Anyway I left the point for future discussion. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: