[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12417?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15542002#comment-15542002
]
Branimir Lambov commented on CASSANDRA-12417:
---------------------------------------------
I wonder if the {{Int32Type}} etc. casts in the various {{compute}} methods are
actually needed as the argument is already of the correct type and boxing is
implied?
Because of the "result must fit source type" logic, {{computeInternal()}} for
both average implementations could return a long/double to avoid the box/unbox
pair in the common non-overflow case.
> Built-in AVG aggregate is much less useful than it should be
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-12417
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12417
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: CQL
> Reporter: Branimir Lambov
> Assignee: Alex Petrov
>
> For fixed-size integer types overflow is all but guaranteed to happen,
> yielding incorrect result. While for sum it is somewhat acceptable as the
> result cannot fit the type, this is not the case for average.
> As the result of average is always within the scope of the source type,
> failing to produce it only signifies a bad implementation. Yes, one can solve
> this by type-casting, but do we really want to always have to be telling
> people that the correct spelling of the average function is
> {{cast(avg(cast(value as bigint))) as int)}}, especially if this is so
> trivial to fix?
> Additionally, the straightforward addition we use for floating point versions
> is not a good choice numerically for larger numbers of values. We should
> switch to a more stable version, e.g. iterative mean using {{avg = avg +
> (value - avg) / count}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
