On 20 January 2016 at 05:58, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 4:02 AM, David Rowley > > <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> Now, there has been talk of this previously, on various threads, but I > don't > >> believe any final decisions were made on how exactly it should be done. > At > >> the moment I plan to make changes as follows: > > Oh, one more point: is there any reason why all of this needs to be a > single (giant) patch? I feel like the handling of internal states > could be a separate patch from the basic patch to allow partial > aggregation and aggregate-combining, and that the latter could be > committed first if we had a reasonably final version of it. That > seems like it would be easier from a review standpoint, and might > allow more development to proceed in parallel, too. I didn't ever really imagine that I'd include any actual new combinefns or serialfn/deserialfn in this patch. One set has of course now ended up in there, I can move these off to the test patch for now. Did you imagine that the first patch in the series would only add the aggcombinefn column to pg_aggregate and leave the aggserialfn stuff until later? I thought it seemed better to get the infrastructure committed in one hit, then add a bunch of new combinefn, serialfn, deserialfns for existing aggregates in follow-on commits. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
