From: | Danny Milosavljevic <danny(dot)milosavljevic(at)fabalabs(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: libpq-fe: PQgetvalue() ? |
Date: | 2006-11-23 11:29:36 |
Message-ID: | 45658620.9070404@fabalabs.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
I'm replying to a thread that is two years old (
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2004-10/msg00099.php
), but:
>Tom Lane wrote at Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:21:29 -0400:
>>Christoph Haller <ch ( at ) rodos ( dot ) fzk ( dot ) de> writes:
>> You cannot PQclear(pgresult_varible) while cstring_varible is in use.
>> You do not need to free cstring_variable, PQclear(pgresult_varible)
will do.
>> I personally prefer to allocate local memory, "strcpy" PQgetvalue,
>> and then PQclear. But that's a matter of taste, I suppose.
>That is surely overkill.
>PQgetvalue doesn't allocate new memory for its result. The docs are
>reasonably clear, I thought:
> The pointer returned by PQgetvalue points to storage that is part
> of the PGresult structure. One should not modify the data it points
> to, and one must explicitly copy the data into other storage if it
> is to be used past the lifetime of the PGresult structure itself.
>
> regards, tom lane
Shouldn't the return type of "PQgetvalue" be "const char*", then?
Maybe its just me...
regards,
Danny Milosavljevic
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
danny.milosavljevic.vcf | text/x-vcard | 257 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2006-11-23 11:46:33 | Re: Integrating Replication into Core |
Previous Message | Francois Rigaudie | 2006-11-23 11:23:02 | Fwd : Rép. : Re: dblink locked query |