Re: plperl features

Do we need a TODO item?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> This was the patch that I took the array processing piece from and
> attempted to fix, since it was badly broken. However, I'm not happy
> about any of the ways of doing it, and suspect I won't get it done for
> 8.1. I think we need that piece done before we look at ANYELEMENT/ANYARRAY.
>
> cheers
>
> andrew
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >Sergej, are you going to repost this patch?
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Also, I don't think the arg_is_p variable is really the proper fix for
> >>>this, but I am unsure what to recomment. Others?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>The thing I didn't like about that was that it assumes there is only
> >>one pseudotype behavior that is or ever will be interesting for plperl.
> >>
> >>I think it'd probably make more sense to store an array of the parameter
> >>type OIDs and then check for ANYELEMENT or ANYARRAY as such in the
> >>places where the patch uses arg_is_p.
> >>
> >> regards, tom lane
> >>
> >>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> >>TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073