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

Re: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c
Date: 2000-07-29 03:29:52
Message-ID: 39824FB0.9A997D09@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> I assume you are looking at the 'setof' processing?  Offhand it seems to
> me that this code is broken anyway: use of a relation type should refer
> to the tuple type, but should *not* imply SETOF, at least IMHO.

No, there is another routine (not remembering the name right now) which
is involved, I *think* from within gram.y, which barfs when called with
"opaque" as an argument (among other things). Can look up more info
later (I'm away this weekend).

                    - Thomas

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-07-29 03:58:03
Subject: pre-6.1-to-6.1 conversion procs slated for destruction
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-07-29 02:55:00
Subject: Re: select distinct

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