From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Aggregate |
Date: | 2016-02-07 15:00:28 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobgXOjDeJmzie3To7f7+hEgW8FVAQ0OTUTHU-J7CrpBbw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Haribabu Kommi
<kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Haribabu Kommi
> <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Here I attached updated patch with additional combine function for
>> two stage aggregates also.
>
> A wrong combine function was added in pg_aggregate.h in the earlier
> patch that leading to
> initdb problem. Corrected one is attached.
I'm not entirely sure I know what's going on here, but I'm pretty sure
that it makes no sense for the new float8_pl function to reject
non-aggregate callers at the beginning and then have a comment at the
end indicating what it does when not invoked as an aggregate.
Similarly for the other new function.
It would be a lot more clear what this patch was trying to accomplish
if the new functions had header comments explaining their purpose -
not what they do, but why they exist.
float8_regr_pl is labeled in pg_proc.h as an aggregate transition
function, but I'm wondering if it should say combine function.
The changes to pg_aggregate.h include a large number of
whitespace-only changes which are unacceptable. Please change only
the lines that need to be changed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Filip Rembiałkowski | 2016-02-07 15:00:46 | Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2016-02-07 14:49:47 | Re: pgcommitfest reply having corrupted subject line |