Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup
Date
Msg-id 5283.1106225879@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Responses Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Re: WIP: pl/pgsql cleanup  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
List pgsql-patches
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2005-01-18 at 01:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It might be better to keep CurrentMemoryContext pointing at a temp
>> context, and translate malloc() to MemoryContextAlloc(function_context)
>> rather than just palloc().  (Of course you could hide this in a macro,
>> maybe falloc()?)

> Are there really enough short-lived pallocs that this is worth the
> trouble?

Not sure, but it seems like at least as straightforward a translation
as the other way.  More to the point, it makes clear the difference
between what is meant to be a long-lived data structure and what isn't.

> One potential issue is that there are plenty of places where
> we'd want to falloc(), but don't have the function easily available
> (e.g. in the parser).

Why not?  You'd need to keep the context-to-use in a static variable,
but that's no great difficulty considering that plpgsql function
parsing needn't be re-entrant.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Zhenbang Wei
Date:
Subject: psql zh_TW translation update for CURRENT
Next
From: "Dave Page"
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] pg_autovacuum fails to start - 8.0 Release