Re: patch implementing the multi-argument aggregates (SOC

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Sergey E. Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> writes:
>> Since the feature freeze is in a few days, I'm sending the first iteration
>> of my patch implementing the multi-argument aggregates (PolyArgAgg) (SOC
>> project)
>
> This patch is nowhere near ready for submission :-(. Most of the

:-(
But now at least I know that...

> comments seem to be "I don't know what to do here" ...
>

No that's not quite true... I have only ~ 2-3 such comments, all others
just express that I marked the places where I've had any little doubts
and which I'll check additionally...

> A general hint on the polymorphic stuff is that you should be able to
> exactly duplicate what's done for polymorphic functions --- or even
> better, get rid of the separate code for aggregates and just invoke
> the existing logic for functions. (You might need to refactor code
> a little bit to separate out the common functionality.)
>
> Instead of copying data inside advance_transition_function, it might
> be better for the caller to store the values into the right fields
> of a temporary FunctionCallInfoData struct, and just pass that to
> advance_transition_function.

Thank you for the hints, I'll think about them...

> The names for the new aggregates seem a bit, how to say, terse and
> unfriendly. SQL generally tends to a more verbose style of naming.
>

The names for the functions came from SQL 2003 standart...

Regards,
Sergey

*******************************************************************
Sergey E. Koposov
Max Planck Institute for Astronomy/Sternberg Astronomical Institute
Tel: +49-6221-528-349
Web: http://lnfm1.sai.msu.ru/~math
E-mail: math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru