Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > What do these URL's have that the current TODO does not? > > > > * Consider using hash buckets to do DISTINCT, rather than sorting > > > > This would be beneficial when there are few distinct values. This is > > already used by GROUP BY. > > Maybe it's just me, but the recent run-through of the TODO list > indicated that there's a fair number of items that people look at and > don't really knowh what they mean. Providing the context (ie: email > thread) that spawned an idea seems extremely valuable in being able to > explain the idea behind a TODO item. They also usually contain valuable > tips about how a TODO could be implemented. In this example, having > quick reference to the discussion about hashagg and first()/last() would > probably prove useful.
True, but sometimes the thread winds all around and there isn't a definative explaination of how to go at something. I woul rather digest the information to improve it, rather than require people to wade around in an email thread. Is there some detail the TODO is missing? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
