Thank you.
I meant to try PQExpBuffer — as you say, it fits much better with existing libpq style. But then I hit on the callback idea which was even more efficient, by a fair margin. It was also considerably simpler both inside libpq and in the client code, eliminating all sorts of awkward questions about who deallocates the buffer in which situations. So I ditched the "dynamic buffer" concept and went with the callback.
One other possible alternative suggests itself: instead of taking a callback and a context pointer, the function could probably just return a struct: status/size, and buffer. Then the caller would have to figure out whether there's a line in the buffer, and if so, process it. It seems like more work for the client code, but it may make the compiler's optimisation work easier.
Jeroen
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 20:45, Jeroen Vermeulen <jtvjtv@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm attaching a diff now. This is not a patch, it's just a discussion piece.
Did you try with PQExpBuffer? I still think that probably fits better
in the API design of libpq. Obviously if it's significantly slower
than the callback approach in this patch then it's worth considering
using the callback approach. Overall it definitely seems reasonable to
me to have an API that doesn't do an allocation per row.
