| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Optimize PL/Perl function argument passing [PATCH] |
| Date: | 2011-02-02 17:10:59 |
| Message-ID: | 4D499023.8020507@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/02/2011 11:45 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
>> But why are we bothering to keep $prolog at
>> all any more, if all we're going to pass it is&PL_sv_no all the
>> time? Maybe we'll have a use for it in the future, but right now we
>> don't appear to unless I'm missing something.
> PostgreSQL::PLPerl::NYTProf would break if it was removed, so I'd rather
> it wasn't.
>
> I could work around that if there's an easy way for perl code to tell
> what version of PostgreSQL. If there isn't I think it would be worth
> adding.
>
>
Not really. It might well be good to add but that needs to wait for
another time. I gather you're plugging in a replacement for mkfunc?
For now I'll add a comment to the code saying why it's there.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tim Bunce | 2011-02-02 17:16:00 | Re: arrays as pl/perl input arguments [PATCH] |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2011-02-02 17:09:59 | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 |