Re: A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2020-03-31 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On 2020-Mar-26, Surafel Temesgen wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:35 PM Andrew Gierth > wrote: > > > > "Alvaro" == Alvaro Herrera writes: > > > > I was largely holding off on doing further work hoping for some > > discussion of which way we should go. If you think my approach is worth >

Re: A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2020-03-26 Thread Surafel Temesgen
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:35 PM Andrew Gierth wrote: > > "Alvaro" == Alvaro Herrera writes: > > > I was largely holding off on doing further work hoping for some > discussion of which way we should go. If you think my approach is worth > pursuing (I haven't seriously tested the performance,

Re: A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2020-01-24 Thread Ryan Lambert
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:06 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > My own inclination is that Andrew's implementation, being more general > in nature, would be the better one to have in the codebase; but we don't > have a complete patch yet. Can we reach some compromise such as if > Andrew's patch is not

Re: A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2020-01-22 Thread Andrew Gierth
> "Alvaro" == Alvaro Herrera writes: Alvaro> My own inclination is that Andrew's implementation, being more Alvaro> general in nature, would be the better one to have in the Alvaro> codebase; but we don't have a complete patch yet. Can we reach Alvaro> some compromise such as if Andrew's

Re: A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2020-01-22 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Hello As this is a valuable feature, it would be good to have something happen here. I wouldn't like to have pg13 ship with no implementation of WITH TIES at all. My own inclination is that Andrew's implementation, being more general in nature, would be the better one to have in the codebase;

Re: A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2020-01-07 Thread Andrew Gierth
> "Surafel" == Surafel Temesgen writes: Surafel> Unlike most other executor node limit node has implementation Surafel> for handling backward scan that support cursor operation but Surafel> your approach didn't do this inherently because it outsource Surafel> limitNode functionality to

Re: A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2020-01-06 Thread Surafel Temesgen
On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 8:40 AM Andrew Gierth wrote: > This patch is a rather hacky implementation of the basic idea for > implementing FETCH ... WITH TIES, and potentially also PERCENT, by using > a window function expression to compute a stopping point. > > Large chunks of this (the

A rather hackish POC for alternative implementation of WITH TIES

2019-11-28 Thread Andrew Gierth
This patch is a rather hacky implementation of the basic idea for implementing FETCH ... WITH TIES, and potentially also PERCENT, by using a window function expression to compute a stopping point. Large chunks of this (the parser/ruleutils changes, docs, tests) are taken from Surafel Temesgen's