Re: Rethinking representation of partial-aggregate steps - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Rethinking representation of partial-aggregate steps
Date
Msg-id 16222.1466973106@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rethinking representation of partial-aggregate steps  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> [ shrug... ]  I do not buy that argument, because it doesn't justify
> the COMBINE option: why shouldn't that be inverted, ie USEFINALFUNC?

Sorry, I meant USETRANSFUNC of course.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Rethinking representation of partial-aggregate steps
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: parallel workers and client encoding