From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Built-in binning functions |
Date: | 2014-07-20 09:01:10 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJYm1DnZ3gua9XhP2NmQXiOL+Gm6+UOD-Yi--PYG0rrzg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 16 July 2014 20:35, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 2014-07-16 10:04 GMT+02:00 Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>:
>
>> On 08/07/14 02:14, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>> Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> here is a patch implementing varwidth_bucket (naming is up for
>>>> discussion) function which does binning with variable bucket width.
>>>
>>>
>>> I didn't see any discussion of the naming question in this thread.
>>> I'd like to propose that it should be just "width_bucket()"; we can
>>> easily determine which function is meant, considering that the
>>> SQL-spec variants don't take arrays and don't even have the same
>>> number of actual arguments.
>>
>>
>> I did mention in submission that the names are up for discussion, I am all
>> for naming it just width_bucket.
>
>
> I had this idea too - but I am not sure if it is good idea. A distance
> between ANSI SQL with_bucket and our enhancing is larger than in our
> implementation of "median" for example.
>
> I can live with both names, but current name I prefer.
Hmmm, not sure. Let's look around and think what words people use.
Transforms of this type are referred to as discretization in formal
literature and as binning in commong usage/statistical software.
width_bucket() seems to refer to an equal-width binning process. The
function being discussed here is a generic mechanism, the boundaries
of which could have been decided using equal-frequency or other
mechanisms. Using the word "width" in those contexts could be
confusing.
Given width_bucket() is already in use for SQL Standard function, I
agree it would be confusing to have same name for different parameter
profiles.
So I suggest that we use the more generic function name bin(), with a
second choice of discretize() (though that seems annoyingly easy to
spell incorrectly)
Whatever we do, it seems clear we need a section in the manual to
describe Statistical Functions, including width_bucket(), whatever we
call this function and including the terms bin, binning, transform,
discretize and discretization to ensure those are easily searchable.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2014-07-20 11:39:19 | Re: pg_stat_statements cluttered with "DEALLOCATE dbdpg_p*" |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2014-07-20 08:31:26 | Production block comparison facility |