Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)
| От | David Rowley |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAApHDvqmpqbiSYa4fVXi_madQKroWXCPw00K8gpKE5==ZyHKLA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) (Ants Aasma <ants.aasma@eesti.ee>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)
Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 6:00 AM, Ants Aasma <ants.aasma@eesti.ee> wrote:
On Dec 15, 2013 6:44 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> > I've attached an updated patch which includes some documentation.
> > I've also added support for negfunc in CREATE AGGREGATE. Hopefully that's
> > an ok name for the option, but if anyone has any better ideas please let
> > them be known.
>
> I'd be a bit inclined to build the terminology around "reverse" instead of
> "negative" --- the latter seems a bit too arithmetic-centric. But that's
> just MHO.To contribute to the bike shedding, inverse is often used in similar contexts.
I guess it's not really bike shedding, most of the work I hope is done, so I might as well try to get the docs polished up and we'd need a consensus on what we're going to call them before I can get that done.
I like both of these better than negative transition function and I agree negative implies arithmetic rather than opposite.
Out of these 2 I do think inverse fits better than reverse, so I guess that would make it "inverse aggregate transition function".
Would that make the CREATE AGGREGATE option be INVFUNC ?
Any other ideas or +1's for any of the existing ones?
Regards
David Rowley
--
Ants Aasma
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: