AW: Last call for comments: fmgr rewrite [LONG]

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: AW: Last call for comments: fmgr rewrite [LONG]
Date: 2000-05-25 09:08:41
Message-ID: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C604AF7D9F@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > typedef struct
> > {
> > FmgrInfo *flinfo; /* ptr to lookup info used for this call
*/
> > Node *context; /* pass info about context of call */
> > Node *resultinfo; /* pass or return extra info about
result */
> > bool isnull; /* function must set true if result is
NULL */
> > short nargs; /* # arguments actually passed */
> > Datum arg[FUNC_MAX_ARGS]; /* Arguments passed to function */
> > bool argnull[FUNC_MAX_ARGS]; /* T if arg[i] is actually NULL
*/
> > } FunctionCallInfoData;
>
> Just wondering what the implications of FUNC_MAX_ARGS is, and whether
> something like...

Why don't we at least look at the way other dbms's seem to work with
unknown sql rows.
Imho it would be good to use an sqlda structure as seen in
Informix, Oracle, SQL Server ....
I know it does have a little more overhead, but it is something db
programmers know how to use. Unfortunately they all seem to use different
techniques when it comes to function arguments to a stored proc, but
I do not really understand why.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2000-05-25 09:12:21 Re: AW: SQL3 UNDER
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB 2000-05-25 08:31:59 AW: More Performance