Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > What do these URL's have that the current TODO does not?
> >
> > * Consider using hash buckets to do DISTINCT, rather than sorting
> >
> > This would be beneficial when there are few distinct values. This is
> > already used by GROUP BY.
>
> Maybe it's just me, but the recent run-through of the TODO list
> indicated that there's a fair number of items that people look at and
> don't really knowh what they mean. Providing the context (ie: email
> thread) that spawned an idea seems extremely valuable in being able to
> explain the idea behind a TODO item. They also usually contain valuable
> tips about how a TODO could be implemented. In this example, having
> quick reference to the discussion about hashagg and first()/last() would
> probably prove useful.
True, but sometimes the thread winds all around and there isn't a
definative explaination of how to go at something. I woul rather digest
the information to improve it, rather than require people to wade around
in an email thread. Is there some detail the TODO is missing?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073