Re: Re: Reusing abbreviated keys during second pass of ordered [set] aggregates

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: Reusing abbreviated keys during second pass of ordered [set] aggregates
Date: 2015-12-22 23:17:31
Message-ID: CAM3SWZQobKJ=rNp2LZU5OOLE0HhOhqitH5gZfCdSL7iSOTEbTA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Right. I don't think that we should back-patch that stuff into 9.5.
>
> OK, so I've gone ahead and committed and back-patched that. Can you
> please rebase and repost the remainder as a 9.6 proposal?

OK. I don't know why you didn't acknowledge in your revision to
sortsupport.h that bitwise inequality must be a reliable proxy for
authoritative value inequality, which is a stronger restriction than
mandating that abbreviated keys always be pass-by-value, but I'm not
going to argue.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-12-22 23:38:25 Re: A Typo in regress/sql/privileges.sql
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2015-12-22 23:10:29 Re: A Typo in regress/sql/privileges.sql