Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Rowley
Тема Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)
Дата
Msg-id CAApHDvr-m_79bdY_xhFd4WkPHdwd8tq4_vM42dwp7j4Ysa6SNA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 9:09 PM, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
I think unless anyone has some objections I'm going to remove the inverse transition for SUM(numeric) and modify the documents to tell the user how to build their own FAST_SUM(numeric) using the built in functions to do it. I'm starting to think that playing around with resetting numeric scale will turn a possible 9.4 patch into a 9.5/10.0 patch. I see no reason why what's there so far, minus sum(numeric), can't go in... 


Of course its only now that I discover that this is not possible to do this:

CREATE AGGREGATE fast_sum (numeric)
(
    stype = numeric,
    sfunc = numeric_avg_accum,
    invfunc = numeric_avg_accum_inv,
    finalfunc = numeric_sum
);

because SUM(numeric) uses an internal type to store the transition state.

hmmm, built-in fast_sum anyone? 
Is there any simple way to limit these to only be used in the context of a window? If so is it worth it?
Would we want fast_sum() for float too?

Regards

David Rowley
 

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Using indices for UNION.
Следующее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: plpgsql.consistent_into