Re: Parallelized polymorphic aggs, and aggtype vs aggoutputtype

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallelized polymorphic aggs, and aggtype vs aggoutputtype
Date: 2016-06-27 15:03:39
Message-ID: 569.1467039819@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> What, if anything, is yet required to close this 9.6 open item?

The original complaint about polymorphic aggs is fixed to my satisfaction.
The business about how non-text-format EXPLAIN reports parallel plans
(<16002(dot)1466972724(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>) remains, but perhaps we should view
that as an independent issue.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christoph Berg 2016-06-27 15:16:04 OpenSSL 1.1 breaks configure and more
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-06-27 15:00:28 Re: Rethinking representation of partial-aggregate steps