Re: release notes
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: release notes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTin1Yb6DsHFv4Wlg49rMBPPrMwNXLysZ9rN3XFwD@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: release notes (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: > Tim Bunce wrote: >> p.s. It also turned to be insufficiently useful for NYTProf since it >> doesn't also update some internals to record the 'filename' and line >> number range of the sub. So PostgreSQL::PLPerl::NYTProf works around >> that by wrapping mkfuncsrc() to edit the generated perl code to include >> a subname in the usual "sub $name { ... }" style. I may offer a patch >> for 9.1 to to make it work that way. > > I put this aside to think about it. > > If the "feature" is not any use should we rip it out? We pretty much > included it because you said it was what you needed for the profiler. > > I'm seriously nervous about adding function names - making functions > directly callable like that could be a major footgun recipe, since now we > are free to hide some stuff in the calling mechanism, and can (and have in > the past) changed that to suit our needs, e.g. when we added trigger support > via a hidden function argument. That has been safe precisely because nobody > has had a handle on the subroutine which would enable it to be called > directly from perl code. There have been suggestions in the past of using > this for other features, so we should not assume that the calling mechanism > is fixed in stone. > > Perhaps we could decorate the subs with attributes, or is that not doable > for anonymous subs? This is still on our open items list - should we do anything about it? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: