Subject: Re: range_agg
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
References: <16d71dc8-34cf-5ebd-1ce5-ccd93c0a14f9@illuminatedcomputing.com>
 <20190504014147.GC28936@fetter.org>
From: Paul Jungwirth <pj@illuminatedcomputing.com>
Message-ID: <16a2d956-f9da-6bed-6473-de9d1ec0a428@illuminatedcomputing.com>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 11:19:27 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190504014147.GC28936@fetter.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/3/19 6:41 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> This suggests two different ways to extend ranges over aggregation:
> one which is a union of (in general) disjoint intervals, two others
> are a union of intervals, each of which has a weight.
> . . .
> I think the cases above, or at least the first two of them, should be
> available. They could be called range_agg, weighted_range_agg, and
> covering_range_agg.

Thanks David! I think these two new functions make sense. Before I 
implement them too I wonder if anyone else has uses for them?

Thanks,

-- 
Paul              ~{:-)
pj@illuminatedcomputing.com