Re: Hash grouping, aggregates

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hash grouping, aggregates
Date: 2003-02-11 15:41:53
Message-ID: 25794.1044978113@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> So one of the items on the TODO list is "Add hash for evaluating GROUP BY
> aggregates (Tom)"

It's done in CVS tip ... give it a try.

> The neat thing is that hash aggregates would allow grouping on data types that
> have = operators but no useful < operator.

Hm. Right now I think that would barf on you, because the parser wants
to find the '<' operator to label the grouping column with, even if the
planner later decides not to use it. It'd take some redesign of the
query data structure (specifically SortClause/GroupClause) to avoid that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2003-02-11 15:44:07 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Benchmarks
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2003-02-11 15:28:28 Re: Hash grouping, aggregates