| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: plperl arginfo |
| Date: | 2010-10-28 17:03:24 |
| Message-ID: | 4CC9ACDC.9090508@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/28/2010 12:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> BTW, maybe we could have the best of both worlds? Dunno about Perl,
> but in some languages it would be possible to instantiate the hash
> only if it's actually touched. Passing the data as a hash definitely
> seems to fit with the spirit of things otherwise, so as long as it
> didn't cost cycles when not needed, I'd be in favor of that API.
Maybe, but I think that's getting rather beyond my perlguts-fu. I think
we'd need to do that via PERL_MAGIC_tied, but it's new territory for me.
Anyone else want to chime in?
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2010-10-28 17:11:13 | Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ... |
| Previous Message | Ben | 2010-10-28 16:57:49 | contsel and gist |