Re: [CAUTION!! freemail] Re: Partial aggregates pushdown
От | Ted Yu |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [CAUTION!! freemail] Re: Partial aggregates pushdown |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALte62xrajt3b7Jr-_p2O9cXFifwYghqSR3MZ9m=36qCJPZvnA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: [CAUTION!! freemail] Re: Partial aggregates pushdown ("Fujii.Yuki@df.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp" <Fujii.Yuki@df.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 1:11 AM Fujii.Yuki@df.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp <Fujii.Yuki@df.mitsubishielectric.co.jp> wrote:
Hi Mr.Yu.
Thank you for comments.
> + * Check that partial aggregate agg has compatibility
>
> If the `agg` refers to func parameter, the parameter name is aggform
I fixed the above typo and made the above comment easy to understand
New comment is "Check that partial aggregate function of aggform exsits in remote"
> + int32 partialagg_minversion = PG_VERSION_NUM;
> + if (aggform->partialagg_minversion ==
> PARTIALAGG_MINVERSION_DEFAULT) {
> + partialagg_minversion = PG_VERSION_NUM;
>
>
> I am curious why the same variable is assigned the same value twice. It seems
> the if block is redundant.
>
> + if ((fpinfo->server_version >= partialagg_minversion)) {
> + compatible = true;
>
>
> The above can be simplified as: return fpinfo->server_version >=
> partialagg_minversion;
I fixed according to your comment.
Sincerely yours,
Yuuki Fujii
Hi,
Thanks for the quick response.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: