From: Chapman Flack <jcflack@acm.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Subject: Re: FmgrInfo allocation patterns (and PL handling as staged programming)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2025 20:41:04 -0400
Message-ID: <67F31F20.6090706@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3112950.1743984111@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <67F2B767.9040507@acm.org>
<2965818.1743960827@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<67F2D87F.1000709@acm.org>
<2978258.1743968866@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<67F30DDA.4000509@acm.org>
<3112950.1743984111@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On 04/06/25 20:01, Tom Lane wrote:
> Looking more closely at ProcedureCreate(), it makes a dependency
> if a transform *exists* for the argument or result type, whether
> a TRANSFORM clause is present or not. Surely this is completely
> bogus? We should be depending on the OIDs mentioned in protrftypes,
I think that's it. I tested by creating a function like
create function foo() returns text transform for type circle
that is, with the transform type not appearing as an argument or
return type.
As far as I know, that's still a cromulent usage, as I could be saying
I want the function to apply that transform to circles it uses or retrieves
in queries it makes.
But if the dependency is being created based on argument/return types
and not on protrftypes, that will slip right through the cracks.
Regards,
-Chap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: jcflack@acm.org, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, peter@eisentraut.org
Subject: Re: FmgrInfo allocation patterns (and PL handling as staged programming)
In-Reply-To: <67F31F20.6090706@acm.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox