| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallelized polymorphic aggs, and aggtype vs aggoutputtype |
| Date: | 2016-06-17 19:26:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20160617192645.GA133331@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I think we should break up internal into various kinds of internal
> > depending on what kind of a thing we've actually got a pointer to.
>
> Not a bad long-term project, but it's not happening in this cycle.
> I'm not very sure how we'd go about it anyway --- for examples
> like this, every new user-defined aggregate potentially wants its
> own flavor of "internal", so how do we manage that?
Can't we have them be ExtensibleNode?
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-06-17 19:27:24 | Re: Parallelized polymorphic aggs, and aggtype vs aggoutputtype |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-06-17 19:14:34 | Re: Parallelized polymorphic aggs, and aggtype vs aggoutputtype |