| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | John Gray <jgray(at)azuli(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Accessing original TupleDesc from SRF |
| Date: | 2002-08-30 14:46:10 |
| Message-ID: | 3D6F8532.4080308@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
John Gray wrote:
> Please correct me if I've got this wrong, but it appears from the SRF
> API, that a SRF cannot readily refer to the TupleDesc to which it is
> expected to conform (i.e. the TupleDesc derived from the FROM clause of
> an original SELECT statement) because that is held in the executor state
> and not copied or linked into the function context.
>
[snip]
>
> Does this sound completely crazy?
>
Not crazy at all. I asked the same question a few days ago:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-08/msg01914.php
Tom suggested a workaround for my purpose, but I do agree that this is
needed in the long run. I looked at it briefly, but there was no easy
answer I could spot. I'll take another look today.
Joe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-30 14:53:19 | Re: tweaking MemSet() performance |
| Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2002-08-30 14:35:39 | Re: contrib features during beta period |