Tom Lane wrote:
> JanWieck@t-online.de (Jan Wieck) writes:
> > I've looked at textout() and, well, your style of detoasting
> > arguments looks alot better and easier. From the way it's
> > implemented I assume the per tuple memory context is done
> > too, no?
>
> Not yet --- I'm running regress tests on it right now, though.
> You're right that I'm assuming the function routines can leak
> memory without trouble.
>
> (We might need to avoid leaks in the comparison routines that are used
> for indexes, but otherwise I think this scheme will work comfortably.)
That sounds bad. At least not very good.
So we better add a PG_FREEARG_xxx(ptr, argno) macro that does the pfree if the pointer is different from the one
in the argument.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
