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

Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger
Date: 2010-10-25 01:34:33
Message-ID: 26683.1287970473@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 10/24/2010 07:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>  writes:
>>> Why do we need the is_trigger flag at all for the plperl hash key? At
>>> first glance it strikes me as unnecessary.

>> We might not.  Does the presence or absence of the $_TD hash reference
>> have any impact on what we cache, or what Perl might cache internally?

> For both trigger and non-trigger functions, we compile this ahead of the 
> user-set function code:
>     our $_TD; local $_TD=shift;
> Non-trigger functions get passed "undef" to correspond to this invisible 
> argument, while trigger functions get passed the hashref that the 
> trigger calling code has set up.

Seems like we don't need it then.  You going to get rid of it?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2010-10-25 01:38:41
Subject: Re: WIP: extensible enums
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-25 01:22:57
Subject: Re: Extensions, this time with a patch

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