From: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: more support for various frame types of window functions |
Date: | 2009-11-09 14:12:30 |
Message-ID: | e08cc0400911090612v1aaea42ch69f28475793228ef@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/11/9 Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>:
>>>>>> "Heikki" == Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>
> Heikki> Yeah, we need the reinitialization support to handle the generic case.
>
> Heikki> One idea is to take a copy of the state datum after each row.
>
> Some existing aggregates, notably array_agg, rely on the assumption
> that this never happens.
I'm carefully coding to keep the existing behavior that when frame
start is UNBOUNDED PRECEDING aggregate state is cached. I don't see
how the copied state will help in other frame types, but is it rather
than that? We assume the frame starting and ending boundary never goes
back.
Regards,
--
Hitoshi Harada
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hitoshi Harada | 2009-11-09 14:20:39 | Re: more support for various frame types of window functions |
Previous Message | Alexandra Roy | 2009-11-09 13:49:04 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.3.8 on AIX5.3 : compilation failed |