Re: PL/Perl Does not Like vstrings

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PL/Perl Does not Like vstrings
Date: 2012-01-04 20:56:41
Message-ID: 21820.1325710601@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 01/04/2012 12:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I looked at that last night but it appeared that SvOK would be perfectly
>> happy. (Didn't actually try it, though, I was just eyeballing the flags
>> in gdb.)

> I tested it and you're right, it doesn't help. I don't see what else we
> can do about it. There doesn't appear to be any test for an SV in the API.

I think what's being passed *is* an SV --- at least, the contents look
reasonable in gdb --- but for some reason SvPVutf8 isn't coping with
this particular kind of SV. Googling suggests that SvPVutf8 used to
fail on READONLY SVs, of which this is one if I'm reading the flag bits
correctly; but that was supposedly fixed years ago. I believe we've hit
some other undocumented limitation of that function, which the Perl guys
may or may not acknowledge as a bug once we've tracked it down better.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2012-01-04 21:02:16 Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2012-01-04 20:51:54 Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2