Re: Any ExecStoreTuple end runs?

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Any ExecStoreTuple end runs?
Date: 2010-01-12 23:48:49
Message-ID: 4B4CB601020000250002E3EC@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
"Kevin Grittner" writes:

>> It's obviously too low level to be the right place to check
>> whether we're in serializable mode and take out locks, but if I
>> look at the callers (like IndexNext or TidNext) which use a valid
>> buffer in a call to ExecStoreTuple, should I be catching all the
>> tuples read from the heap?

> It doesn't really matter, because any patch putting such functionality
> into ExecStoreTuple would be rejected. It's an utterly inappropriate
> place.

Which is what I said.

> I think you'd probably be best off to put the hook in SeqNext,
> IndexNext, etc. Sometimes multiple call sites are the cleanest
> solution.

Which is what I said.

I'm glad we agree.

>From your response, I assume that there aren't any end runs to cover.

Thanks,

-Kevin

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-01-13 00:06:59 Re: Feature patch 1 for plperl [PATCH]
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-01-12 23:39:58 Re: Any ExecStoreTuple end runs?