Re: Properly mark NULL returns in numeric aggregates
От | Jesse Zhang |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Properly mark NULL returns in numeric aggregates |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGf+fX5FwjBUjA7WahGvX-OcqhjKB6d072eNa7RiFZ+0tG31Qg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Properly mark NULL returns in numeric aggregates (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Properly mark NULL returns in numeric aggregates
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 3:59 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > They can't be strict because the initial iteration needs to produce > something from a null state and non-null input. nodeAgg's default > behavior won't work for those because nodeAgg doesn't know how to > copy a value of type "internal". > > regards, tom lane Ah, I think I get it. A copy must happen because the input is likely in a shorter-lived memory context than the state, but nodeAgg's default behavior of copying a by-value datum won't really copy the object pointed to by the pointer wrapped in the datum of "internal" type, so we defer to the combine function. Am I right? Then it follows kinda naturally that those combine functions have been sloppy on arrival since commit 11c8669c0cc . Cheers, Jesse
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: