Re: Parallelized polymorphic aggs, and aggtype vs aggoutputtype

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: Parallelized polymorphic aggs, and aggtype vs aggoutputtype
Date: 2016-06-22 20:53:36
Message-ID: 2175.1466628816@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> I've gone and implemented the dummy argument approach for
>> deserialization functions.

> How do you feel about the further idea of locking down the signatures
> to be exactly "serialize(internal) returns bytea" and "deserialize(bytea,
> internal) returns internal", and removing pg_aggregate.aggserialtype?
> I don't see very much value in allowing any other nominal transmission
> type besides bytea; and the less flexibility in these function signatures,
> the less chance of confusion/misuse of other internal-related functions.

Not hearing any objections, pushed that way.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-06-22 21:32:56 Re: MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2016-06-22 20:51:46 Re: Reference to UT1