Re: [HACKERS] tuplesort_gettuple_common() and *should_free argument - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] tuplesort_gettuple_common() and *should_free argument
Date
Msg-id 21113.1485385863@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] tuplesort_gettuple_common() and *should_free argument  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] tuplesort_gettuple_common() and *should_free argument  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
> It means "another call to tuplesort_gettupleslot", but I believe that
> it would be safer (more future-proof) to actually specify "the slot
> contents may be invalidated by any subsequent manipulation of the
> tuplesort's state" instead.

WFM.

>> There are several other uses of "call here", both in this patch and
>> pre-existing in tuplesort.c, that I find equally vague and unsatisfactory.
>> Let's try to improve that.

> Should I write a patch along those lines?

Please.  You might want to hit the existing ones with a separate patch,
but it doesn't much matter; I'd be just as happy with a patch that did
both things.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] tuplesort_gettuple_common() and *should_free argument
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] tuplesort_gettuple_common() and *should_free argument