From: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: CREATE CONVERSION |
Date: | 2002-07-06 00:53:32 |
Message-ID: | 20020706.095332.115922236.t-ishii@sra.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I see two different functions linked to from each pg_wchar_table
> entry... although perhaps those are associated with encodings
> not with conversions.
Yes. those are not directly associated with conversions.
> IIRC the existing conversion functions deal in C string pointers and
> lengths. I'm a little worried about the extra overhead implicit
> in converting to a TEXT object and back again; that probably means at
> least two more palloc and memcpy operations. I think you'd be better
> off sticking to a C-level API, because I really don't believe that
> anyone is going to code conversion functions in (say) plpgsql.
I am worried about that too. But if we stick a C-level API, how can we
define the argument data type suitable for C string? I don't see such
data types. Maybe you are suggesting that we should not use CREATE
FUNCTION?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-06 02:08:54 | Re: Issues Outstanding for Point In Time Recovery (PITR) |
Previous Message | Manfred Koizar | 2002-07-05 23:38:05 | Page type and version |