| From: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Aggregation push-down |
| Date: | 2018-01-29 14:01:47 |
| Message-ID: | 5A6F294B.8010502@anastigmatix.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/29/18 03:32, Antonin Houska wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> only take place if we had a special equality operator which distinguishes the
>>> *binary* values (I don't know yet how to store this operator the catalog ---
...
>> We don't have an operator that tests for binary equality, but it's
>> certainly testable from C; see datumIsEqual.
Disclaimer: I haven't been following the whole thread closely. But could
there be some way to exploit the composite-type *= operator?
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/functions-comparisons.html#COMPOSITE-TYPE-COMPARISON
-Chap
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2018-01-29 14:11:47 | Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11 |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2018-01-29 13:49:56 | Re: Logical Decoding and HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum assumptions |