Re: Function array_agg(array)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ali Akbar
Тема Re: Function array_agg(array)
Дата
Msg-id CACQjQLqwadsE=L797yLygd9nbLJD4FL-S5Cuiy_90FSWMdgZ4g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Function array_agg(array)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Function array_agg(array)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
2014-11-26 0:38 GMT+07:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> 2014-10-27 11:20 GMT+01:00 Ali Akbar <the.apaan@gmail.com>:
>> [ array_agg_anyarray-13.patch ]

> This patch is ready for commit

I've committed this after some significant modifications.

I did not like the API chosen, specifically the business about callers
needing to deal with both accumArrayResult and accumMdArray, because that
seemed pretty messy and error-prone. 

Thanks!

When in the reviewing process, we tried to implement in existing API, and it was messy, so the last patch is with two API. We didn't think what you eventually did. 3 API: existing for scalar, a new API for array, _and_ a new API for both. Great!!

Just curious, in accumArrayResultArr, while enlarging array and nullbitmaps, why it's implemented with:

astate->abytes = Max(astate->abytes * 2,
                                 astate->nbytes + ndatabytes);

and 

astate->aitems = Max(astate->aitems * 2, newnitems);

won't it be more consistent if it's implemented just like in the first allocation?:

while (astate->aitems <= newnitems)
                            astate->aitems *= 2;

Anyway, thanks for the big modifications. I learned a lot from that.

Regards,
--
Ali Akbar

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Adam Brightwell
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Role Attribute Bitmask Catalog Representation
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Function array_agg(array)