From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | Regina Obe <lr(at)pcorp(dot)us>, 'PostgreSQL-development' <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Aggregation support for aggregate functions that use transitions not implemented for array_agg |
Date: | 2017-06-06 19:26:09 |
Message-ID: | 20170606192609.lgwzs2pcr4ng7et5@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-06-06 12:23:49 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 01:52:45PM -0400, Regina Obe wrote:
> > It seems CREATE AGGREGATE was expanded in 9.6 to support parallelization of
> > aggregate functions using transitions, with the addition of serialfunc and
> > deserialfunc to the aggregate definitions.
> >
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/sql-createaggregate.html
> >
> > I was looking at the PostgreSQL 10 source code for some example usages of
> > this and was hoping that array_agg and string_agg would support the feature.
> > At a cursory glance, it seems they do not use this.
> > Examples I see that do support it are the average and standard deviation
> > functions.
> >
> > Is there a reason for this or it just wasn't gotten to?
I'd suggest trying to write a parallel version of them ;). Shouldn't be
too hard.
> I'd bet on lack of tuits. Anything with text has to deal with
> collation issues, etc., that may make this trickier than it first
> appears.
I don't see how collations makes things more complicated here.
- Andres
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-06-06 19:33:48 | Re: Fix performance degradation of contended LWLock on NUMA |
Previous Message | David Fetter | 2017-06-06 19:23:49 | Re: Parallel Aggregation support for aggregate functions that use transitions not implemented for array_agg |