Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Speed dblink using alternate libpq tuple storage

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: markokr(at)gmail(dot)com, greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com, shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: Speed dblink using alternate libpq tuple storage
Date: 2012-03-29 21:56:50
Message-ID: 14939.1333058210@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> I'm sorry to have coded a silly bug.
> The previous patch has a bug in realloc size calculation.
> And separation of the 'connname patch' was incomplete in regtest.
> It is fixed in this patch.

I've applied a modified form of the conname update patch.  It seemed to
me that the fault is really in the DBLINK_GET_CONN and
DBLINK_GET_NAMED_CONN macros, which ought to be responsible for setting
the surrounding function's conname variable along with conn, rconn, etc.
There was actually a second error of the same type visible in the dblink
regression test, which is also fixed by this more general method.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-03-29 22:16:44
Subject: Re: Command Triggers patch v18
Previous:From: Dimitri FontaineDate: 2012-03-29 21:10:51
Subject: Re: Command Triggers patch v18

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group