Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1xQbDtrJOZq5NTQ+8Pf=s3EB88ZWK-p0qKOKKbH573rhA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] partial aggregation with internal state type  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes:
> The docs for creating aggregates for 9.6 and beyond say:
> "For aggregate functions whose state_data_type is internal, the combinefunc
> must not be strict. In this case the combinefunc must ensure that null
> states are handled correctly and that the state being returned is properly
> stored in the aggregate memory context."

> Since combinefunc with an internal type is only useful when serialfunc and
> deserialfunc are also defined, why can't the built-in machinery just do the
> right thing when faced with a strict combinefunc?

The issue is how to initialize the state value to begin with.

Why does it need to be initialized?  initializing a NULL state upon first use is already the job of sfunc.  Can't it just be left NULL if both inputs are NULL?  (and use serialize/deserialize to change the memory context of the not-NULL argument if one is NULL and one is not NULL)
 

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] transition table behavior with inheritance appearsbroken (was: Declarative partitioning - another take)
Следующее
От: Supun Nakandala
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] How to refer to resource files from UDFs written in C