Re: Strange result with LATERAL query

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: Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Strange result with LATERAL query
Date: 2016-08-24 16:29:10
Message-ID: 21741.1472056150@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:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom> I think it's a bit too stupid as-is, though. We don't need to
> Tom> recalculate for Params in aggdirectargs, do we?

> In theory we would need to.

How come? Those are only passed to the final function, no? They
shouldn't affect what is in the hash table.

> But in practice we don't, because we don't
> allow ordered aggs in AGG_HASHED mode anyway.

True, it's moot at the moment.

> We could skip filling in aggParam at all if not in AGG_HASHED mode I
> guess.

Yeah, I'm planning to make it do that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2016-08-24 16:32:48 Re: [Patch] Temporary tables that do not bloat pg_catalog (a.k.a fast temp tables)
Previous Message Andrew Gierth 2016-08-24 16:22:21 Re: Strange result with LATERAL query