On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Sergey E. Koposov" <math@sai.msu.ru> writes:
>> Since the feature freeze is in a few days, I'm sending the first iteration
>> of my patch implementing the multi-argument aggregates (PolyArgAgg) (SOC
>> project)
>
> This patch is nowhere near ready for submission :-(. Most of the
:-(
But now at least I know that...
> comments seem to be "I don't know what to do here" ...
>
No that's not quite true... I have only ~ 2-3 such comments, all others
just express that I marked the places where I've had any little doubts
and which I'll check additionally...
> A general hint on the polymorphic stuff is that you should be able to
> exactly duplicate what's done for polymorphic functions --- or even
> better, get rid of the separate code for aggregates and just invoke
> the existing logic for functions. (You might need to refactor code
> a little bit to separate out the common functionality.)
>
> Instead of copying data inside advance_transition_function, it might
> be better for the caller to store the values into the right fields
> of a temporary FunctionCallInfoData struct, and just pass that to
> advance_transition_function.
Thank you for the hints, I'll think about them...
> The names for the new aggregates seem a bit, how to say, terse and
> unfriendly. SQL generally tends to a more verbose style of naming.
>
The names for the functions came from SQL 2003 standart...
Regards,
Sergey
*******************************************************************
Sergey E. Koposov
Max Planck Institute for Astronomy/Sternberg Astronomical Institute
Tel: +49-6221-528-349
Web: http://lnfm1.sai.msu.ru/~math
E-mail: math@sai.msu.ru
