Re: JSON constructors and window functions

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru
Subject: Re: JSON constructors and window functions
Date: 2022-04-04 18:25:10
Message-ID: f73bbf99-e17a-fdcc-fdfd-6a1096b6c12a@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 4/4/22 11:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 4/3/22 22:46, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> On 4/3/22 20:11, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> I don't think you're allowed to free stuff in a finalfunc - we might reuse the
>>>> transition state for further calls to the aggregate.
>>> Doh! Of course! I'll fix it in the morning. Thanks.
>> I've committed a fix for this. I didn't find something to clean out the
>> hash table, so I just removed the 'hash_destroy' and left it at that.
>> All the test I did came back with expected results.
>> Maybe a hash_reset() is something worth having assuming it's possible? I
>> note that simplehash has a reset function.
> But removing the hash entries would be just as much of a problem
> wouldn't it?
>
>

Yes, quite possibly. It looks from some experimentation as though,
unlike my naive preconception, it doesn't process each frame again from
the beginning, so losing the hash entries could indeed be an issue here.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-04-04 18:31:24 Re: Run pg_amcheck in 002_pg_upgrade.pl and 027_stream_regress.pl?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-04-04 18:19:56 Re: JSON constructors and window functions