| From: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Using 128-bit integers for sum, avg and statistics aggregates |
| Date: | 2015-03-09 12:39:04 |
| Message-ID: | 54FD9468.5010906@proxel.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/07/2015 07:18 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> What I am wondering is if those numeric_int16_* functions that also deal
> with either the Int128AggState or NumericAggState should be renamed in
> similar fashion.
You mean something like numeric_poly_sum instead of numeric_int16_sum? I
personally am not fond of either name. While numeric_int16_* incorrectly
implies we have a int16 SQL type numeric_poly_* does not tell us that
this is an optimized version which uses a smaller state.
The worst part of writing this patch has always been naming functions
and types. :)
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-03-09 12:54:56 | Re: pg_trgm Memory Allocation logic |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-03-09 12:08:49 | Re: [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes |