Re: PG_GETARG_TEXT_PP vs PG_GETARG_TEXT_P - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PG_GETARG_TEXT_PP vs PG_GETARG_TEXT_P
Date
Msg-id 3109893.1654982727@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PG_GETARG_TEXT_PP vs PG_GETARG_TEXT_P  (Markur Sens <markursens@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Markur Sens <markursens@gmail.com> writes:
> On 12 Jun 2022, at 12:06 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> PG_GETARG_TEXT_PP is preferred in new code since it can avoid one
>> step of palloc-and-copy-the-value; the only real downside is you
>> have to use the appropriate macros to get the string's start address
>> and length.

> Is it worth adding a relevant comment in the documentation section? 

It is documented in the source code where these macros are defined
(fmgr.h).

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Markur Sens
Date:
Subject: Re: PG_GETARG_TEXT_PP vs PG_GETARG_TEXT_P
Next
From: Rino Mardo
Date:
Subject: Re: newbie db design question