On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2010/1/19 Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>> Yeah, that's my point, too. The planner has to distinguish "four" from
>> sort pathkeys and to teach the executor the simple information which
>> column should be used to determine frame. I was bit wrong because some
>> of current executor code isn't like it, like using ordNumCols == 0 to
>> know whether partition equals to frame, though....
> And here's another version to fix this problem (I hope). Now the
> planner distinguish sort column from actual significant pathkeys. I
> tested it on both of 32bit and 64bit Linux.
Would it make sense to pull some of the infrastructure bits out of
this patch and commit those bits separately, so as to reduce the size
of the main patch? In particular, the AggGetMemoryContext() stuff
looks like a good candidate for that treatment.
Why did you change BETWEEN from a TYPE_FUNC_NAME_KEYWORD to a COL_NAME_KEYWORD?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-01-22 20:12:03|
|Subject: Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) |
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-01-22 19:20:01|
|Subject: Re: quoting psql varible as identifier|