| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Odd out of memory problem. |
| Date: | 2012-03-31 12:13:06 |
| Message-ID: | 1333195986.29688.2.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On fre, 2012-03-30 at 22:59 -0700, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> I don't know exactly how PL/Proxy or pgpool accomplish the multi-phase
> aggregate,
They don't.
> but in theory the proposal above is state-merge function,
> so it doesn't apply to general aggregate results that passed through
> the final function. Of course some functions that don't have final
> functions are ok to call state-merge function on the results.
You're right, it's not quite the same thing. But perhaps it could be
kept in mind if someone wants to develop things in this area.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gabriele Bartolini | 2012-03-31 12:25:51 | Re: Patch pg_is_in_backup() |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-03-31 11:28:03 | Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes |