On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 at 08:51, Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon Nov 3, 2025 at 7:47 PM -03, David Rowley wrote:
> > Are you sure you've not got something else in your branch? It applies
> > ok here, and the CFbot isn't complaining either. CFBot's is based on
> > cf8be0225, which is 2 commits before the one you're trying, but
> > src/test/regress/expected/aggregates.out hasn't been changed since
> > 2025-10-07.
> >
> Yes, my branch is clean, I even tried to apply on a cleaned git clone
> but it is still failling to apply, very strange. I've added the cfbot
> remote and cherry picked your commit and this works. I'll investigate
> later why I'm not able to apply your patch directly.
Did you look at: git diff origin/master..master ?
I've certainly accidentally periodically committed to my local master
which I ended up doing: git reset --hard origin/master to fix
> The code seems good to me, I don't have too many comments, I'm just not
> sure if we should keep the #ifdef NOT_USED block but I'm not totally
> against it. I'm +1 for the idea.
Thanks for the review. I might not have been clear that I had only
intended the NOT_USED part as an example for during the review period.
I'd never intended it going any further.
I've attached a version with the NOT_USED part removed (and a bunch of
#includes I forgot to remove). The only other change was a minor
revision to some comments.
The primary concern I have now is when in planning that we do this
Aggref simplification. Maybe I shouldn't be too concerned about that
as there doesn't seem to be a current reason not to put it where it
is. If someone comes up with a reason to do it later in planning at
some point in the future, we can consider moving it then. That sort of
excludes extensions with aggregates that want to have a
SupportRequestSimplifyAggref support function that might need the
processing done later in planning, but that just feels like a
situation that's unlikely to arise.
David
