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

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 (view raw or flat)
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

pgsql-hackers by date

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

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