Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)
| От | David Rowley |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAApHDvrOvHqGzvOGz9dqiqXw_UxM9wEk8A+enbHWjS9Bgwj6iA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:What is the state of play on this patch? Is the latest version what's in
> I've attached an updated invtrans_strictstrict_base patch which has the
> feature removed.
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/64F96FD9-64D1-40B9-8861-E6182029220B@phlo.org
plus this sub-patch? Is everybody reasonably happy with it? I don't
see it marked "ready for committer" in the CF app, but time is running
out.
As far as I know the only concern left was around the extra stats in the explain output, which I removed in the patch I attached in the previous email.
The invtrans_strictstrict_base.patch in my previous email replaces the invtrans_strictstrict_base_038070.patch in that Florian sent here http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/64F96FD9-64D1-40B9-8861-E6182029220B@phlo.org all of the other patches are unchanged so it's save to use Florian's latest ones
Perhaps Dean can confirm that there's nothing else outstanding?
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: