| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Paul Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: range_agg |
| Date: | 2019-07-05 16:48:29 |
| Message-ID: | cdd809b0869d3bb334e68ed9ebdd1d3f97289338.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2019-07-05 at 07:58 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> The question is naming - should be this agg function named
> "range_agg", and multi range agg "multirange_agg"? Personally, I have
> not a problem with range_agg, and I have not a problem so it is based
> on union operation. It is true so only result of union can be
> implemented as range simply. When I though about multi range result,
> then there are really large set of possible algorithms how to do some
> operations over two, three values.
Hi Pavel,
Can you explain in more detail? Would an intersection-based aggregate
be useful? If so, and we implement it in the future, what would we call
it?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paul A Jungwirth | 2019-07-05 16:58:02 | Re: range_agg |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-07-05 16:48:10 | Re: [PATCH v4] Add \warn to psql |