| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Built-in binning functions |
| Date: | 2014-09-09 19:36:11 |
| Message-ID: | 20889.1410291371@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 07/09/14 21:09, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2014-09-07 15:05:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I think the main remaining issue is that we don't have consensus on
>>> the function name AFAICT. I'm okay with using width_bucket(), as
>>> is done in the latest patch, but there were objections ...
>> Just reread that part of the thread and personally I disliked all the
>> other suggested names more than width_bucket.
> Same here, that's why I didn't change it.
Not hearing any further discussion, I committed it with that name
(and a bit of further cleanup).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Johnston | 2014-09-09 19:40:45 | Re: [9.3] Should we mention "set_config(...)" in 18.1.3 in Server Configuration? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-09-09 19:13:17 | Re: [9.3] Should we mention "set_config(...)" in 18.1.3 in Server Configuration? |