Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type
От | Jeff Janes |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMkU=1xQbDtrJOZq5NTQ+8Pf=s3EB88ZWK-p0qKOKKbH573rhA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes:
> The docs for creating aggregates for 9.6 and beyond say:
> "For aggregate functions whose state_data_type is internal, the combinefunc
> must not be strict. In this case the combinefunc must ensure that null
> states are handled correctly and that the state being returned is properly
> stored in the aggregate memory context."
> Since combinefunc with an internal type is only useful when serialfunc and
> deserialfunc are also defined, why can't the built-in machinery just do the
> right thing when faced with a strict combinefunc?
The issue is how to initialize the state value to begin with.
Why does it need to be initialized? initializing a NULL state upon first use is already the job of sfunc. Can't it just be left NULL if both inputs are NULL? (and use serialize/deserialize to change the memory context of the not-NULL argument if one is NULL and one is not NULL)
Cheers,
Jeff
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: