Re: HashAgg's batching counter starts at 0, but Hash's starts at 1. (now: incremental sort)

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 06:33:32PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 5:22 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> > Because filtering out zero values is exactly what's intended to be avoided for
> > nontext output.
> >
> > I think checking whether the method was used should result in the same output,
> > without the literal check for zero value (which itself sets a bad example).
> 
> It seems fine to me as-is. What about SORT_TYPE_TOP_N_HEAPSORT? Or any
> other sort methods we add in the future?

Feel free to close it out.  I'm satisfied that we've had a discussion about it.

-- 
Justin