From: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: arrays as pl/perl input arguments [PATCH] |
Date: | 2011-01-26 20:08:03 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinwBMf9gsiKHTXrNxQy7Q9vh+jOkpw3=EQKHm6y@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:44, Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Jan 26, 2011, at 8:45 PM, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 15:48, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 13:04, Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 12, 2011, at 8:52 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 12, 2011, at 5:14 AM, Alexey Klyukin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean packing both a string representation and a reference to a single SV * value?
>>>>>
>>>>> Dunno, I'm not a guts guy.
>>>>
>>>> Well, neither me (I haven't used much of the guts api there).
>>>
>>> Find attached a proof of concept that modifies Alexey's patch to do
>>> the above (using the overload example I and others posted).
>> [ ... ]
>>> Thoughts? Should I polish this a bit more? Or do we like the GUC better?
>>
>> So its been over a week with no comments. ISTM there were more people
>> against adding yet another GUC. Barring objection ill finish the
>> missing parts of the POC patch I posted and submit that.
>
> I've played with that patch just today. I found a problem with it, when I tried to use the array in a string context the backend segfaulted with: "WARNING: Deep recursion on subroutine "main::encode_array_literal" at -e line 74" just before the segfault. I think the problem is in the regexp check in 'encode_array_literal' (it's obviously reversed comparing with the original one),
Yeah, I noticed that after I sent it out :(.
> but it still segfaults after I fixed that.
I seem to recall fixing this post email as well... Can you provide the
function that broke so I can double check? (Or was it part of the
regression test?)
Thanks for taking the time to play with it.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-26 20:08:51 | Re: ALTER TYPE 3: add facility to identify further no-work cases |
Previous Message | Richard Broersma | 2011-01-26 20:05:39 | Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Mentors for Funded Reviewers |