Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?)
Date
Msg-id 7565.1398439329@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?)  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?)  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2014-04-24 19:40:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * Because HeapTupleGetDatum might allocate a new tuple, the wrong thing
>> might happen if the caller changes CurrentMemoryContext between
>> heap_form_tuple and HeapTupleGetDatum.

> It's fscking ugly to allocate memory in a PG_RETURN_... But I don't
> really have a better backward compatible idea :(

It's hardly without precedent; see PG_RETURN_INT64 or PG_RETURN_FLOAT8 on
a 32-bit machine, for starters.  There's never been an assumption that
these macros couldn't do that.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: UUIDs in core WAS: 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?)