| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Tuple conversion naming |
| Date: | 2018-10-02 15:02:35 |
| Message-ID: | 20181002150235.36xnqcgu7xhpbunw@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-10-02 17:28:26 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2018/10/02 16:40, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'm kinda wondering if we shouldn't have the tuple
> > conversion functions just use the slot based functionality in the back,
> > and just store those in the TupConversionMap.
>
> Sorry, I didn't understand this.
I was basically wondering if we should just allocate two slots in
TupConversionMap and then drive the tuple conversion via the slots.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-10-02 15:58:53 | Re: has_column_privilege behavior (was Re: Assert failed in snprintf.c) |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-10-02 14:58:53 | Re: transction_timestamp() inside of procedures |