Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> writes: > David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> [ avoid duplicate calculations for related aggregates ] > From the information you have proposed storing, with cost factors > associated with the functions, it seems technically possible to > infer that you could run (for example) the avg() aggregate to > accumulate both but only run the final functions of the aggregates > referenced by the query. That seems like an optimization to try > hard to forget about until you have at least one real-world use > case where it would yield a significant benefit. It seems > premature to optimize for that before having the rest working.
Actually, I would suggest that you forget about all the other aspects and *just* do that, because it could be made to work today on existing aggregate functions, and it would not require hundreds-to-thousands of lines of boilerplate support code in the grammar, catalog support, pg_dump, yadda yadda. That is, look to see which aggregates use the same transition function and run that just once. We already have the rule that the final function can't destroy the transition output, so running two different final functions on the same transition result should Just Work.
Good idea.
I believe the only extra check, besides do they use the same transfn, would be the initvalue of the aggregate.
I'll write a patch and post in the next couple of days.
