| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rethinking representation of partial-aggregate steps |
| Date: | 2016-06-23 23:35:03 |
| Message-ID: | 12297.1466724903@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> As for the above proposal, I do agree that it'll be cleaner with bit
> flags, I just really don't see the need for the AGGTYPE_* alias
> macros. For me it's easier to read if each option is explicitly listed
> similar to how pull_var_clause() is done, e.g:
That does not sound to me like it does anything to address the issue of
documenting which combinations of flags are sensible/supported. I prefer
something like the enum approach I suggested further downthread.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2016-06-24 00:45:41 | Re: Feature suggestions: "dead letter"-savepoint. |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2016-06-23 23:14:32 | Re: Rethinking representation of partial-aggregate steps |