Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name?
От | Hitoshi Harada |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e08cc0400812202035o50b12793vc432d9d0aac75dde@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is "Window" really safe as a global typedef name?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2008/12/21 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> So I'm thinking we'd better rename it, but I'm not coming up with >>> anything good; the best I can do after a long day is "EvalWindow", >>> and that doesn't seem particularly inspired. Any suggestions? > >> EvalWindow sounds like a function in src/backend/executor/. > >> WindowAgg? > > WindowAgg seems like a winner to me, because it draws a parallel to > the regular Agg node type, which seems valid unless I've completely > misunderstood what's happening... I disagree with WindowAgg. The aggregates are subset of window functions in the node, though much code is similar and ported from nodeAgg. The spec introduces its concept as "Windowed Table". So I'd suggest "WindowedTable" or "WindowTable". Or "Windowed" if shortened. Regards, -- Hitoshi Harada
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: