2010/8/3 Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com>: > Hello > > 2010/8/3 Joshua Tolley <eggyk...@gmail.com>: >> In case anyone's interested, I've taken the CTE-based grouping sets patch >> from >> [1] and made it apply to 9.1, attached. I haven't yet done things like >> checked >> it for whitespace consistency, style conformity, or anything else, but (tuits >> permitting) hope to figure out how it works and get it closer to >> commitability >> in some upcoming commitfest. >> >> I mention it here so that if someone else is working on it, we can avoid >> duplicated effort, and to see if a CTE-based grouping sets implementation is >> really the way we think we want to go. >> > > I am plaing with it now :). I have a plan to replace CTE with similar > but explicit executor node. The main issue of existing patch was using > just transformation to CTE. I agree, so it isn't too much extensiable > in future. Now I am cleaning identifiers little bit. Any colaboration > is welcome. > > My plan: > 1) clean CTE patch > 2) replace CTE with explicit executor node, but still based on tuplestore > 3) when will be possible parallel processing based on hash agg - then > we don't need to use tuplestore
Couldn't you explain what exactly "explicit executor node"? I hope we can share your image to develop it further than only transformation to CTE. Regards, -- Hitoshi Harada -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
