| 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>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(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: | 2016-01-19 16:58:09 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZmHKQ6hUFDHU-7Y3oAX_+L17G+Ye8o5cAa5O4aAgERSg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> [ rewinding to here from the detour I led us on ]
>
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 4:02 AM, David Rowley
> <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Now, there has been talk of this previously, on various threads, but I don't
>> believe any final decisions were made on how exactly it should be done. At
>> the moment I plan to make changes as follows:
Oh, one more point: is there any reason why all of this needs to be a
single (giant) patch? I feel like the handling of internal states
could be a separate patch from the basic patch to allow partial
aggregation and aggregate-combining, and that the latter could be
committed first if we had a reasonably final version of it. That
seems like it would be easier from a review standpoint, and might
allow more development to proceed in parallel, too.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2016-01-19 17:02:03 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-01-19 16:56:50 | Re: Combining Aggregates |