Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1f0q7W-0007WV-3D
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:02:42 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1f0q7U-0004tm-Vz
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:02:40 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1f0q3J-0004vH-RX
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 14:58:22 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1f0q3G-0008R7-HY
	for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 14:58:19 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w2REwEHV013701;
	Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:58:14 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
        Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
        Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>,
        Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
        PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKJS1f-1zxwY9-jWwdB47+24NwbUzgWAOAGhECnvQKSDXRP_wg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAKJS1f-Qcv2FiUHKCS_2OT3Gb3bOW_yZw9mKSCj=SDwYMH85hA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180327002617.fjgkgxmeojfkti7b@alvherre.pgsql>
 <CAKJS1f-1zxwY9-jWwdB47+24NwbUzgWAOAGhECnvQKSDXRP_wg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Tue, 27 Mar 2018 13:38:42 +1300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <13699.1522162694.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:58:14 -0400
Message-ID: <13700.1522162694@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-hackers.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers>
Precedence: bulk

David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 27 March 2018 at 13:26, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>> synchronized_seqscans is another piece of precedent in the area, FWIW.

> This is true. I guess the order of aggregation could be made more
> certain if we remove the cost based optimiser completely, and just
> rely on a syntax based optimiser.

None of this is responding to my point.  I think the number of people
who actually don't care about aggregation order for these aggregates
is negligible, and none of you have argued against that; you've instead
selected straw men to attack.

			regards, tom lane