Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Select Git revision
  • benchmark-tools
  • postgres-lambda
  • master default
  • REL9_4_25
  • REL9_5_20
  • REL9_6_16
  • REL_10_11
  • REL_11_6
  • REL_12_1
  • REL_12_0
  • REL_12_RC1
  • REL_12_BETA4
  • REL9_4_24
  • REL9_5_19
  • REL9_6_15
  • REL_10_10
  • REL_11_5
  • REL_12_BETA3
  • REL9_4_23
  • REL9_5_18
  • REL9_6_14
  • REL_10_9
  • REL_11_4
23 results

comment.c

Blame
    • Tom Lane's avatar
      3651a3e6
      Support the syntax · 3651a3e6
      Tom Lane authored
      	CREATE AGGREGATE aggname (input_type) (parameter_list)
      along with the old syntax where the input type was named in the parameter
      list.  This fits more naturally with the way that the aggregate is identified
      in DROP AGGREGATE and other utility commands; furthermore it has a natural
      extension to handle multiple-input aggregates, where the basetype-parameter
      method would get ugly.  In fact, this commit fixes the grammar and all the
      utility commands to support multiple-input aggregates; but DefineAggregate
      rejects it because the executor isn't fixed yet.
      I didn't do anything about treating agg(*) as a zero-input aggregate instead
      of artificially making it a one-input aggregate, but that should be considered
      in combination with supporting multi-input aggregates.
      3651a3e6
      History
      Support the syntax
      Tom Lane authored
      	CREATE AGGREGATE aggname (input_type) (parameter_list)
      along with the old syntax where the input type was named in the parameter
      list.  This fits more naturally with the way that the aggregate is identified
      in DROP AGGREGATE and other utility commands; furthermore it has a natural
      extension to handle multiple-input aggregates, where the basetype-parameter
      method would get ugly.  In fact, this commit fixes the grammar and all the
      utility commands to support multiple-input aggregates; but DefineAggregate
      rejects it because the executor isn't fixed yet.
      I didn't do anything about treating agg(*) as a zero-input aggregate instead
      of artificially making it a one-input aggregate, but that should be considered
      in combination with supporting multi-input aggregates.