| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Aggregate FILTER option is broken in v10 |
| Date: | 2017-10-16 20:19:56 |
| Message-ID: | 20171016201956.fk4xqo5dkq56ubzw@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-10-16 11:12:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I think possibly the best answer is to revert 8ed3f11bb. We could
> > think about some compromise solution like merging the projections
> > only for aggregates without FILTER. But that would require two
> > code paths through the relevant functions in nodeAgg.c, which would
> > be a substantial maintenance burden; and the extra branches required
> > means that this would be a net negative for performance in the
> > simplest case with only one aggregate.
>
> Hmm ... on closer inspection, the only performance-critical place
> where this matters is advance_aggregates, and that already has a check
> for whether the particular aggregate has a filter. So we could do
> something like
>
> /* Skip anything FILTERed out */
> if (filter)
> {
> // existing code to eval/check filter expr
> +
> + /* Now it's safe to evaluate this agg's arguments */
> + slot = ExecProject(pertrans->argproj);
> }
> + else
> + slot = aggstate->evalslot;
>
> which seems like a pretty minimal extra cost for the normal case
> with no filter.
Thanks, that looks like a reasonable fix.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-10-16 20:50:41 | Re: oversight in EphemeralNamedRelation support |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-10-16 20:01:48 | Re: Still another race condition in recovery TAP tests |