>> 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

Reply via email to