From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(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 22:55:55 |
Message-ID: | CAKJS1f96XQLMLjSG=sk=TRCVWmnxJuRNNnRt0voSPsVhB0BVAQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2016-03-15 23:04:07 | Re: NOT LIKE index support |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-03-15 22:55:04 | Re: Minor bug affecting ON CONFLICT lock wait log messages |