Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5283.1106225879@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup
Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup |
Список | pgsql-patches |
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: > On Tue, 2005-01-18 at 01:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> It might be better to keep CurrentMemoryContext pointing at a temp >> context, and translate malloc() to MemoryContextAlloc(function_context) >> rather than just palloc(). (Of course you could hide this in a macro, >> maybe falloc()?) > Are there really enough short-lived pallocs that this is worth the > trouble? Not sure, but it seems like at least as straightforward a translation as the other way. More to the point, it makes clear the difference between what is meant to be a long-lived data structure and what isn't. > One potential issue is that there are plenty of places where > we'd want to falloc(), but don't have the function easily available > (e.g. in the parser). Why not? You'd need to keep the context-to-use in a static variable, but that's no great difficulty considering that plpgsql function parsing needn't be re-entrant. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: