From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg |
Date: | 2018-03-28 13:54:38 |
Message-ID: | 18741.1522245278@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 03/28/2018 05:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Getting a solution that would work for other polymorphic serialization
>> functions seems like a bit of a research project to me. In the meantime,
>> I think David's right that what we need to look at is the actual input
>> type of the aggregate, and then assume that what's to be serialized is
>> an array of that. Conceivably an aggregate could be built that uses
>> these serial/deserial functions and yet its input type is something else
>> than what it constructs an array of ... but I find it a bit hard to
>> wrap my brain around what that would be exactly.
> But David's fix doesn't check the aggregate to produce an array of the
> input type (or anyarray). It could easily be an aggregate computing a
> bloom filter or something like that, which has no such issues in the
> serial/deserial functions.
Oh, if he's not restricting it to these serialization functions, I agree
that seems wrong. I thought the discussion was about what to do after
checking the functions.
> Also, if it's checking aggref->aggargtypes, it'll reject anyelement
> parameters, no?
I had in mind to look at exprType() of the argument.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2018-03-28 13:57:30 | Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg |
Previous Message | Nicolas Thauvin | 2018-03-28 13:54:11 | segfault due to invalid cached plan |