| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nicholas White <n(dot)j(dot)white(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Troels Nielsen <bn(dot)troels(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Request for Patch Feedback: Lag & Lead Window Functions Can Ignore Nulls |
| Date: | 2014-07-07 08:21:09 |
| Message-ID: | 1404721269.9081.171.camel@jeff-desktop |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2014-07-06 at 21:11 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-16 at 12:50 +0100, Nicholas White wrote:
> > Thanks for the detailed feedback, I'm sorry it took so long to
> > incorporate it. I've attached the latest version of the patch, fixing
> > in particular:
Looking a little more:
* No tests exercise non-const offsets
* No tests for default clauses with IGNORE NULLS
* The use of bitmapsets is quite ugly. It would be nice if the API would
grow the BMS within the memory context in which it was allocated, but I
don't even see that the BMS is necessary. Why not just allocate a
fixed-size array of bits, and forget the BMS?
* Is there a reason you're leaving out first_value/last_value/nth_value?
I think they could be supported without a lot of extra work.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Khandekar | 2014-07-07 08:32:15 | Re: [PATCH] introduce XLogLockBlockRangeForCleanup() |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-07-07 07:48:44 | Re: pg_xlogdump --stats |