Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2010-02-08 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 7:19 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: The answer is nobody got round to enhancing this yet and well considered proposals and subsequent patches would be welcome. what is a well considered proposal in this area? the transition function cost should be applied

Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-12-03 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 11:53 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: 2009/11/30 Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec: Hi, why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? seems like while we can set the cost of the state transition function, that cost is not

Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-12-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec wrote: 2009/11/30 Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec: Hi, why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? seems like while we can set the cost of the state transition function, that

Re: [HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-11-30 Thread Jaime Casanova
2009/11/30 Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec: Hi, why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? seems like while we can set the cost of the state transition function, that cost is not propagated... -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de

[HACKERS] set the cost of an aggregate function

2009-11-29 Thread Jaime Casanova
Hi, why we can't do $subject? it could have any benefit on the planner? -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. +59387171157 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make