>> If it's a bad way to do it, that's certainly an argument for keeping >> (or maybe generalizing) intagg. > > There was actually a patch this past commitfest to *add* functionality to > intagg. When I reviewed it I said it would make more sense to generalize it > and integrate that functionality into the base array operations.
I suppose it's just a question of finding enough round tuits. I might take a look at it but my grasp of toasting and memory management may not be good enough yet. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
