Re: Bug in 9.0Alpha4 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gokulakannan Somasundaram
Subject Re: Bug in 9.0Alpha4
Date
Msg-id 9362e74e1003170130u2fd0c745wa0db07b04da362f7@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bug in 9.0Alpha4  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

When we were doing the ordered-aggregates patch, I considered passing
all those values as explicit parameters to transformAggregateCall,
and having it build the Aggref node from scratch and return it.
However having seven or eight parameters to transformAggregateCall
(and more in future if we ever add more features here) didn't really
seem to be better style than abusing Aggref a bit.  But maybe it is
the best way after all.  Thoughts?


I feel it would be good, if we send the parameters explicitly and if that increases, put it inside another structure(data carriage structure) and send it.. But please take my suggestion as a novice one. :))

Thanks,
Gokul.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Takahiro Itagaki
Date:
Subject: Re: Partitioning syntax
Next
From: Pavel Golub
Date:
Subject: PQftype implementation