On 05/25/2016 03:32 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se> writes:
>> On 05/25/2016 02:41 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I'd rather extend see us ALTER AGGREGATE to do this.
>
>> Wouldn't that prevent this from going into 9.6? I do not think changing
>> ALTER AGGREGATE is 9.6 materials.
>
> Well, it's debatable --- but if the patch to do it is small and the
> alternatives are really ugly, that would be an acceptable choice IMO.
> Certainly we'd want to add that capability eventually anyway.
Looked at this quickly and I do not think adding it would be what I
consider a small patch since we would essentially need to copy the
validation logic from DefineAggregate and AggregateCreate and modify it
to fit the alter case. I am leaning towards either either leaving the
aggregate functions alone or updating the catalog manually.
Andreas
