Re: [HACKERS] Aggregate transition state merging vs. hypothetical setfunctions
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Aggregate transition state merging vs. hypothetical setfunctions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | d2e1afd4-659c-50d6-1b20-7cfd3675e909@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Aggregate transition state merging vs. hypothetical set functions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Aggregate transition state merging vs. hypothetical set functions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/13/17 19:01, Tom Lane wrote: >> Moving on to the exact color of the bikeshed: it seems like the right >> way to present this to users of CREATE AGGREGATE is in terms of "does >> the final function modify the transition state?". So maybe the values >> could be spelled >> SMODIFY = READ_ONLY ffunc never touches state, ok as window agg >> SMODIFY = SHARABLE ffunc does some one-time change like sorting, >> so state merging is OK but not window agg >> SMODIFY = READ_WRITE ffunc trashes state, can't do merging either >> I'm not set on these names by any means; anyone have a better idea? Is "sharable" the preferred spelling, as opposed to "shareable"? -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: