| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Combining Aggregates |
| Date: | 2016-01-20 12:44:42 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZPVDet6wvLoEmM4FrMzkEYdMiBjqf9UssFCEBeYe22Qg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:38 AM, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> To my mind, priority #1 ought to be putting this fine new
>> functionality to some use. Expanding it to every aggregate we've got
>> seems like a distinctly second priority. That's not to say that it's
>> absolutely gotta go down that way, but those would be my priorities.
>
> Agreed. So I've attached a version of the patch which does not have any of
> the serialise/deserialise stuff in it.
>
> I've also attached a test patch which modifies the grouping planner to add a
> Partial Aggregate node, and a final aggregate node when it's possible.
> Running the regression tests with this patch only shows up variances in the
> EXPLAIN outputs, which is of course expected.
That seems great as a test, but what's the first patch that can put
this to real and permanent use?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2016-01-20 12:53:39 | Re: Combining Aggregates |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2016-01-20 12:38:39 | Re: Combining Aggregates |