Re: converting datum to numeric - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Szymon Guz
Subject Re: converting datum to numeric
Date
Msg-id CAFjNrYsLOLjhbfQj5GXj+nqowXyWhebEQgcbap3ZGc-n0Qh=qg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: converting datum to numeric  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 25 June 2013 08:51, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello

2013/6/25 Szymon Guz <mabewlun@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
> I've got a couple of questions.
>
> I was using numeric_out like this:
>
> DatumGetCString(DirectFunctionCall1(numeric_out, d));
>
> Why do I have to use DirectFunctionCall1 instead of calling numeric_out?

numeric_out functions doesn't use C calling convention - it use own
convention for support NULL values and some other informations.
DirectFunctionCall1 is simple function that transform C like call to
PostgreSQL call. You can do it directly, but you have to prepare
necessary structures.

>
>
> I was suggested to use numeric_send instead of numeric_out, however when
> changing the function names in the above example, the whole expression
> returns 8. Always 8. I check with:
>
> char *x = DatumGetCString(DirectFunctionCall1(numeric_send, d));
> PLy_elog(NOTICE, x).
>

"send" functions are used for binary protocol - so it is nonsense.



Hi,
thanks for the information. So I will leave speeding it up for this moment.

thanks,
Szymon

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review])
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: [9.4 CF 1] The Commitfest Slacker List