"Robert Haas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If it's a bad way to do it, that's certainly an argument for keeping > (or maybe generalizing) intagg.
There was actually a patch this past commitfest to *add* functionality to intagg. When I reviewed it I said it would make more sense to generalize it and integrate that functionality into the base array operations. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
