From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
Cc: | Oleksiy Shchukin <Oleksiy(dot)Shchukin(at)globallogic(dot)com>, "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [BUGS] BUG #4599: bugfix for contrib/dblink module |
Date: | 2009-01-03 15:26:18 |
Message-ID: | 28719.1230996378@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> On line 795 below, fail should get set to PG_GETARG_BOOL(1). However, as
> line 842 is about to be executed, fail is still set to true, even though
> PG_GETARG_BOOL(1) is clearly false. Any ideas?
I can't duplicate that here, but my first reaction on studying this code
is "ick!". Having a non-set-returning function calling the SRF
infrastructure (and not bothering to clean it up on exit, either) is
just horrid --- I have no idea what side-effects that might have, but at
the very least there's going to be a memory leak. Trying to implement
three significantly different functions as one function with a maze of
if's is not good style in any case.
I think you should break those three functions apart. There is no value
in having send_query share any code with the others. It might be
feasible to have the other two share a subroutine that collects the
result data.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joe Conway | 2009-01-03 20:00:22 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #4599: bugfix for contrib/dblink module |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2009-01-03 03:55:37 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #4599: bugfix for contrib/dblink module |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-01-03 15:54:58 | Re: generic reloptions improvement |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-01-03 15:24:34 | Re: reloptions and toast tables |