Re: Possible bug in plpgsql/src/gram.y

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Also, can someone tell my why we use malloc in plpgsql?
>
> Plain palloc() won't do because the compiled tree for the function needs
> to outlive the current query.  However, malloc() is not cool.  Really,
> these structures ought to be built in a memory context created specially
> for each function --- then it'd be possible to reclaim the memory if the
> function is deleted or we realize we need to invalidate its compiled
> tree.
>
> I've had this in mind to do for awhile, but haven't gotten to it.
> Do you want to put it on TODO?
   Planned  that  myself,  but  dropped the plan again because I   think it'd be better to start more or less from
scratch with   a complete new PL that supports modules, global variables and   the like. After 2-3 years we  could
simply remove  the  old   style PL/pgSQL then.
 


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com