Re: Detection of nested function calls

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Hugo Mercier <hugo(dot)mercier(at)oslandia(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Detection of nested function calls
Date: 2013-10-25 12:42:56
Message-ID: CAFj8pRC9vfSq-DE2i0aUuMBrpp_HxoVXBa-eEQXMPdsPYbc=Mg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2013/10/25 Hugo Mercier <hugo(dot)mercier(at)oslandia(dot)com>

> Le 25/10/2013 14:29, Pavel Stehule a écrit :
> > Hello
> >
> >
> > 2013/10/25 Hugo Mercier <hugo(dot)mercier(at)oslandia(dot)com
> > <mailto:hugo(dot)mercier(at)oslandia(dot)com>>.
> >
> > I am quite new to postgresql hacking, so I'm sure there is room for
> > improvements. But, what about this first proposal ?
> >
> >
> > I am not sure, if this solution is enough - what will be done if I store
> > some values in PL/pgSQL variables?
> >
>
> You mean if you store the result of a (nested) function evaluation in a
> PL/pgSQL variable ?
> Then no nesting will be detected by the parser and in this case the user
> function must ensure its result is serialized, since it could be stored
> (in a variable or a table) at any time.
>

ok

I remember, so I though about similar optimization when I worked on SQL/XML
implementation - so same optimization can be used there.

Regards

Pavel

>
> --
> Hugo Mercier
> Oslandia
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2013-10-25 13:13:20 Re: CLUSTER FREEZE
Previous Message Hugo Mercier 2013-10-25 12:38:12 Re: Detection of nested function calls