Re: Why is fncollation in FunctionCallInfoData rather than fmgr_info?

From: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why is fncollation in FunctionCallInfoData rather than fmgr_info?
Date: 2018-06-06 20:25:14
Message-ID: 87in6vwtzo.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "Andres" == Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:

Andres> I think it's not unreasonable to think of it that way, but it's
Andres> really not how it is used today. In pretty much all cases the
Andres> collation is known and determined at the time fmgr_info() is
Andres> called (we also commonly reuse FunctionCallInfoData structs).

The obvious case which is not one of those "pretty much all cases" is
where DirectFunctionCallN[Coll] is used - which turns out to be not all
that unusual.

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2018-06-06 20:26:00 Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-06-06 20:20:24 Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack