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

SRF patch (was Re: [HACKERS] Set Returning Functions (SRF) - request for patch review and comment)

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: SRF patch (was Re: [HACKERS] Set Returning Functions (SRF) - request for patch review and comment)
Date: 2002-05-08 04:34:55
Message-ID: 3CD8AAEF.6000100@joeconway.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:
> Sure.  foo.foo is valid for a column foo in a table foo, so I don't
> see a problem with it for a function.

Fixed

> 
> You could try doing the text substitution on the diff file and then
> re-applying the diff to fresh sources.  Might get a couple of merge
> failures, but should be a lot less painful than doing the edit directly
> on the full sources.
> 

Great idea! Turned out to be a relatively painless 10 minute exercise.

> Up to you; probably should wait to see if Iter is still in your way
> after you do the other thing.  I think removing it and instead inserting
> returnsSet booleans in Oper and Func nodes would be a pretty
> straightforward exercise, but it'll mean touching even more stuff.
> Might be best to do that as a separate patch.

I'd like to wait on this -- I'm already drinking from a firehose ;-)


> 
> Fair enough.  We should try to get the bulk of the patch applied soon
> so that you don't have code drift problems.  The rescan issues should
> not involve touching nearly as much code.

I also fixed the execute permissions, switched from ExecEvalFunc to 
ExecEvalExpr, and fixed a bug that I found in _outRangeTblEntry (which 
was preventing creation of a VIEW using a RangeFunction). If this could 
be applied it would definitely help -- it's getting hard to keep it in 
sync with cvs due to its size. The patch applies cleanly to cvs tip as 
of a few minutes ago, and passes all regression tests.

Thanks,

Joe

Attachment: srf.2002.05.07.2.patch.gz
Description: application/x-gzip (21.0 KB)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-05-08 04:49:27
Subject: Re: How much work is a native Windows application?
Previous:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2002-05-08 04:03:37
Subject: Re: How much work is a native Windows application?

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2002-05-08 05:17:13
Subject: Re: SRF patch (was Re: [HACKERS] Set Returning Functions
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-05-07 17:40:10
Subject: Re: Set Returning Functions (SRF) - request for patch review and comment

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