| From: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) |
| Date: | 2014-04-04 10:56:55 |
| Message-ID: | 2C70B563-6562-425C-9C53-F36E39F7ACC4@phlo.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 04.04.2014, at 09:40, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how much additional work is required to sort this out,
> but to me it looks more realistic to target 9.5 than 9.4, so at this
> point I tend to think that the patch ought to be marked as returned
> with feedback.
I think the patch is worthwhile, even without this additional optimization. In fact, If the optimization was part of the patch, there would probably be calls to factor it out, on the ground that the patch is already rather large.
I don't see what bumping the whole thing to 9.5 buys, compared do applying what we have now, and optimizing in 9.5 further.
best regards,
Florian Pflug
PS: Sorry for the broken mail I sent earlier - miss-touched on my Phone ;-(
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | YAMAMOTO Takashi | 2014-04-04 11:11:56 | Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067) |
| Previous Message | Florian Pflug | 2014-04-04 10:50:29 | Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP) |