On 2016-08-29 12:56:25 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 08/28/2016 12:48 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Attached is a significantly updated patch series (see the mail one up
> > for details about what this is, I don't want to quote it in its
> > entirety).
> >
> > There's still some corner cases (DISTINCT + SRF, UNION/INTERSECT with
> > SRF) to test / implement and a good bit of code cleanup to do. But
> > feature wise it's pretty much complete.
>
> Looks good
Thanks for the look!
> aside from the few FIXMEs, TODOs and XXXs
Those I pretty much know to handle.
> DIRTYs.
But I think this one is the "ordering" dependency information, and there
I don't yet have good idea.
> I think we need to come up with a better word for "unsrfify". That's quite a
> mouthful. Perhaps something as boring as "convert_srfs_to_function_rtes".
Yea, that was more of a working title. Maybe implement_targetlist_srfs()?
> Would it make sense for addRangeTableEntryForFunction() to take a List of
> RangeFunctionElems as argument, now that we have such a struct? The
> lists-of-same-length approach gets a bit tedious.
Yea, I was thinking the same.
> Typos:
> s/fortfour/forfour
> s/Each element of this list a/ Each element of this list is a/
Thanks.
Greetings,
Andres Freund