Re: Re: Reusing abbreviated keys during second pass of ordered [set] aggregates

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> PFA my proposal for comment changes for 9.5 and master. This is based
>>> on your 0001, but I edited somewhat. Please let me know your
>>> thoughts. I am not willing to go further and rearrange actual code in
>>> 9.5 at this point; it just isn't necessary.
>>
>> Fine by me. But this revision hasn't made the important point at all
>> -- which is that 0002 is safe. That's a stronger guarantee than the
>> abbreviated key representation being pass-by-value.
>
> Right. I don't think that we should back-patch that stuff into 9.5.

OK, so I've gone ahead and committed and back-patched that. Can you
please rebase and repost the remainder as a 9.6 proposal?

Thanks,

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company