Re: [HACKERS] Transition functions for SUM(::int2), SUM(::int4, SUM(::int8])

Caleb Welton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Forgive me if I'm being dense, but could you explain why int4_sum(bigint,int) must not be strict, but int4_avg_accum(bytea, int) can be strict? The former is used with a NULL initial value, the latter isn't. Read the fine print in the CREATE AGGREGATE

Re: [HACKERS] Transition functions for SUM(::int2), SUM(::int4, SUM(::int8])

Thanks Tom, Forgive me if I'm being dense, but could you explain why int4_sum(bigint,int) must not be strict, but int4_avg_accum(bytea, int) can be strict? It seems that both of them have transition datatypes that are different from the input. -Caleb On 1/28/08 7:31 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL

[HACKERS] Transition functions for SUM(::int2), SUM(::int4, SUM(::int8])

Is there any reason that int2_sum, int4_sum, and int8_sum are not marked as being strict? All the other transition functions for sum, and every other built in aggregation function is marked as strict, as demonstrated with: select x.proname, t.proname, t.proisstrict from ((pg_aggregate a left

Re: [HACKERS] Transition functions for SUM(::int2), SUM(::int4, SUM(::int8])

Caleb Welton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is there any reason that int2_sum, int4_sum, and int8_sum are not marked as being strict? They wouldn't work otherwise, because the transition datatypes aren't the same as the inputs. regards, tom lane