Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvovqhBKjg6+e85Tda-3neZNnKe-w4rRiFOTbHjdWC99AQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates  (Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates  (Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 at 13:16, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 at 05:24, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm wondering if 1349d279 should have just never opted to presort
> > Aggrefs which have volatile functions so that the existing behaviour
> > of unordered output is given always and nobody is fooled into thinking
> > this works correctly only to be disappointed later when they add some
> > other aggregate to their query or if we should fix both.  Certainly,
> > it seems much easier to do the former.
> >
>
> I took a look at this, and I agree that the best solution is probably
> to have make_pathkeys_for_groupagg() ignore Aggrefs that contain
> volatile functions.

Thanks for giving that some additional thought.  I've just pushed a
fix which adjusts things that way.

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Generating code for query jumbling through gen_node_support.pl