| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Paul Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: format_datum debugging function |
| Date: | 2024-08-15 14:05:07 |
| Message-ID: | 451803.1723730707@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
> On 14.08.24 17:46, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
>> Are you doing something to get macro expansion? I've never gotten my gdb
>> to see #defines, although in theory this configure line should do it,
>> right?:
> Oh I see, you don't have the F_* constants available then. Maybe just
> put in the OID manually then?
That's pretty illegible and error-prone. I agree that writing the
output function's C name is noticeably better. However, I would
call the result DirectOutputFunctionCall and put it near
OidOutputFunctionCall in fmgr.c. It's not like we don't already
have a naming convention and many instances of this.
(Also, now that I look at the code, I wonder why it looks so
little like any of the existing DirectFunctionCall functions.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yasir | 2024-08-15 14:13:29 | Re: Alias of VALUES RTE in explain plan |
| Previous Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2024-08-15 14:01:47 | Re: Opinion poll: Sending an automated email to a thread when it gets added to the commitfest |