Re: Aggregate ORDER BY patch

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Aggregate ORDER BY patch
Date: 2009-12-14 18:06:40
Message-ID: 11070.1260814000@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> Updated version of the aggregate order by patch.

I'm starting to look at this now. I find it rather bizarre to merge
both the actual arguments of an aggregate and the optional ORDER BY
expressions into a single targetlist. It doesn't seem like that would
be an especially convenient representation to work with, and I would
also expect there to be a nonzero performance hit from the extra
TargetEntry expression nodes, even when the feature is not in use.
Why didn't you use separate lists?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-12-14 18:13:25 Re: Hot Standby, release candidate?
Previous Message Greg Stark 2009-12-14 18:02:56 Re: Hot Standby, release candidate?