| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Farina <dfarina(at)truviso(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add tests to dblink covering use of COPY TO FUNCTION |
| Date: | 2009-11-25 04:45:53 |
| Message-ID: | 162867790911242045g1e6b8fbbp88d2769b6fb483af@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/11/25 Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>:
> On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 14:39 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> a) good designed C API like:
>>
>> initialise_functions(fcinfo) -- std fcinfo
>> consument_process_tuple(fcinfo) -- gets standard row -- Datum
>> dvalues[] + Row description
>> producent_process_tuple(fcinfo) -- returns standard row -- Datum
>> dvalues[] + Row description (look on SRF API)
>> terminate_funnction(fcinfo)
>>
>
> Don't you still need the functions to accept an argument of type
> internal? Otherwise, we lose the ability to copy a buffer to the dblink
> connection, which was the original motivation.
>
It depends on design. I don't thing so internal is necessary. It is
just wrong design.
Pavel
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2009-11-25 04:52:45 | Re: Syntax for partitioning |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-25 04:44:26 | Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add tests to dblink covering use of COPY TO FUNCTION |