Re: SLOPE - Planner optimizations on monotonic expressions.

From: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SLOPE - Planner optimizations on monotonic expressions.
Date: 2026-07-03 20:21:37
Message-ID: CAN4CZFPD5Sa7s8S716j7YHDkvsioHQrpEDRdy7H8n0VJvd0W3g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thanks for the updated version, I didn't find more correctness issues
with the patch in v9.

> Is there a written standard/recommendation for these, maybe
> /*
> * arg0_asc_slope_support
> *
> * Prosupport: f(x, ...) is monotonically increasing in x.
> */

I think most of the function comment's don't mention the function name
at all, but those that do follow this approach with a blank line.
At some places I also see a

/* functionname: some description
*
* more description
*/

pattern.

CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION log10(numeric)
RETURNS numeric
LANGUAGE sql
+ SUPPORT arg0_asc_slope_support
IMMUTABLE PARALLEL SAFE STRICT COST 1
RETURN log(10, $1);

Shouldn't these additions, and generally the feature itself / how it
works / what's the contract for functions / ... have proper
documentation as it is user/extension facing?

Another similar question is if the feature should have an enable_
toggle similar to others, enable_slope?

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Fomin 2026-07-03 20:22:58 [PATCH v1 0/7] Wait event timing and tracing instrumentation
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2026-07-03 20:17:31 Re: Coverage (lcov) failing with inconsistent error in versions 2.x