Re: Parallel Aggregate

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(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: 2016-03-15 23:58:10
Message-ID: CA+TgmobuOcw8xNvc6K-x5doiOk7xy0S6fW+jW8ketVTX6SMwgQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:55 PM, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 16 March 2016 at 11:00, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I don't see why we would need to leave aggpartial out of the equals()
>> check. I must be missing something.
>
> See fix_combine_agg_expr_mutator()
>
> This piece of code:
>
> /*
> * Aggrefs for partial aggregates are wrapped up in a PartialAggref,
> * we need to look into the PartialAggref to find the Aggref within.
> */
> foreach(lc, context->subplan_itlist->tlist)
> {
> PartialAggref *paggref;
> tle = (TargetEntry *) lfirst(lc);
> paggref = (PartialAggref *) tle->expr;
>
> if (IsA(paggref, PartialAggref) &&
> equal(paggref->aggref, aggref))
> break;
> }
>
> if equals() compared the aggpartial then this code would fail to find
> the Aggref in the subnode due to the aggpartial field being true on
> one and false on the other Aggref.

...and why would one be true and the other false?

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2016-03-16 00:04:34 Re: Parallel Aggregate
Previous Message Andreas Karlsson 2016-03-15 23:04:07 Re: NOT LIKE index support