I'm fine with moving the operators over to functions. I just don't want to
implement anything that is against best practice. If we are OK with that
direction, I'll go ahead and start on the new patch.
Ian
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Craig Ringer writes:
> > On 07/02/2013
Craig Ringer writes:
> On 07/02/2013 02:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I'm actually
>> not clear that it would be all that bad to assume fixed operator
>> names, as we apparently do in a few places despite the existence of
>> operator classes. But if that is bad, then I don't know how using @+
>> a
On 07/02/2013 02:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I'm actually
> not clear that it would be all that bad to assume fixed operator
> names, as we apparently do in a few places despite the existence of
> operator classes. But if that is bad, then I don't know how using @+
> and @- instead helps anything.
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Currently, all operator classes are tied to access methods. Since
>> nobody seems to have any great idea about creating an access method that
>> requires addition and subtraction, would it make sense to have operat
On 07/01/2013 12:05 AM, ian link wrote:
> Definitely not this week. Hopefully for next commit fest.
>
OK, marked "Returned with Feedback". It'll be up to you to add it to
the next commitfest if you think it's ready by then.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Robert Haas escribió:
>> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:54 PM, ian link wrote:
>
>> > It seems pretty clear that assuming '+' and '-' are addition and
>> > subtraction
>> > is a bad idea. I don't think it would be too tricky to add support for
Robert Haas escribió:
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:54 PM, ian link wrote:
> > It seems pretty clear that assuming '+' and '-' are addition and subtraction
> > is a bad idea. I don't think it would be too tricky to add support for new
> > operator strategies. Andrew Gierth suggested calling these
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:54 PM, ian link wrote:
> I found some time and I think I am up to speed now. I finally figured out
> how to add new operator strategies and made a little test operator for
> myself.
>
> It seems pretty clear that assuming '+' and '-' are addition and subtraction
> is a b
Definitely not this week. Hopefully for next commit fest.
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 06/30/2013 08:54 PM, ian link wrote:
> > I found some time and I think I am up to speed now. I finally figured out
> > how to add new operator strategies and made a little test ope
On 06/30/2013 08:54 PM, ian link wrote:
> I found some time and I think I am up to speed now. I finally figured out
> how to add new operator strategies and made a little test operator for
> myself.
>
> It seems pretty clear that assuming '+' and '-' are addition and
> subtraction is a bad idea. I
I found some time and I think I am up to speed now. I finally figured out
how to add new operator strategies and made a little test operator for
myself.
It seems pretty clear that assuming '+' and '-' are addition and
subtraction is a bad idea. I don't think it would be too tricky to add
support f
Thanks Craig! That definitely does help. I probably still have some
questions but I think I will read through the rest of the code before
asking. Thanks again!
Ian
> Craig Ringer
> Friday, June 21, 2013 8:41 PM
>
> On 06/22/2013 03:30 AM, ian link wrote:
>>
>> Forgive my ignorance, but I don't en
On 06/22/2013 03:30 AM, ian link wrote:
> Forgive my ignorance, but I don't entirely understand the problem. What
> does '+' and '-' refer to exactly?
Consider "RANGE 4.5 PRECEDING'.
You need to be able to test whether, for the current row 'b', any given
row 'a' is within the range (b - 4.5) < a
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't entirely understand the problem. What
does '+' and '-' refer to exactly?
Thanks!
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 3:20 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
>> On 06/21/2013 05:32 PM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>>
>> > I also
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 3:20 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 06/21/2013 05:32 PM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>
> > I also later found that we are missing not only notion of '+' or '-',
> > but also notion of 'zero value' in our catalog. Per spec, RANGE BETWEEN
> > needs to detect ERROR if the offset val
On 06/21/2013 05:32 PM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> I also later found that we are missing not only notion of '+' or '-',
> but also notion of 'zero value' in our catalog. Per spec, RANGE BETWEEN
> needs to detect ERROR if the offset value is negative, but it is not
> always easy if you think about i
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
> I've missed this feature more than once, and am curious about whether
> any more recent changes may have made it cleaner to tackle this, or
> whether consensus can be formed on adding the new entries to btree's
> opclass to avoid the undesira
Thanks! The discussions
have been useful, although I am currently just reviewing the code.
I think a good starting point will be to refactor/imrpove the
WinGetFuncArgInPartition and WinGetFuncArgInFrame functions.
Tom Lane wrote this about them before comitting the patch:
I'm
not terribly happ
On 06/21/2013 10:31 AM, Ian Link wrote:
> I am currently looking into this feature. However, as I am quite new to
> Postgres, I think it might take me a while to get up to speed. Anyways,
> I would also appreciate another round of discussion on the future of the
> windowing functions.
Good to know
I am currently looking
into this feature. However, as I am quite new to Postgres, I think it
might take me a while to get up to speed. Anyways, I would also
appreciate another round of discussion on the future of the windowing
functions.
Ian Link
Craig Ringer
Thursday, J
Hi all
Since 8.4, PostgreSQL has had extremely useful window function support -
but support for "RANGE PRECEDING / FOLLOWING" windows was dropped late
in 8.4's development in order to get the rest of the feature in, per
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-02/msg00540.php.
It looks l
21 matches
Mail list logo
