Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Cc: zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz (Karel Zak - Zakkr), sszabo(at)bigpanda(dot)com
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate
Date: 1999-12-24 00:44:20
Message-ID: 8200.945996260@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"D'Arcy" "J.M." Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> writes:
>> ! Why is textcat() (and other) function called if result from this
>> function is ignored, it is bad spending (my CPU is not boredom). See
>> my 'C' example in my first letter...

> This is the issue no matter which side of the debate you are on.

"Debate"? There's no debate --- everybody agrees that the current
fmgr interface doesn't handle NULLs reasonably. It's just a matter
of finding time to fix it. It's a fairly large project, given the
amount of code that needs to be touched.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-12-24 00:49:25 Re: [HACKERS] Source code format votes
Previous Message Jan Wieck 1999-12-23 23:13:37 Re: [HACKERS] Source code format votes