| From: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: issues with eager aggregation |
| Date: | 2026-09-17 23:58:07 |
| Message-ID: | CAMbWs49dEz5y-fiPbvO58T8R3SEz3+nryRp0YVtruFNoegXtzw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 12:55 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 10:58 AM Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > As for the division-by-zero case, I agree it's user-visible, but I
> > think eager aggregation should follow the same rules as our existing
> > transformations, which already evaluate expressions on rows that a
> > join removes.
> OK, good. So this isn't really doing something that is fundamentally
> new, which is what I was fearing. Do you think this section should be
> adjusted at all?
Yes, I think it's worth saying that an expression can be evaluated on
rows that don't appear in the result.
- Richard
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-09-18 00:20:15 | Re: issues with eager aggregation |
| Previous Message | Sami Imseih | 2026-09-17 23:40:33 | Re: Reject WAIT FOR earlier in transaction-snapshot mode |