Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size
Date: 2023-02-23 18:56:56
Message-ID: 587321.1677178616@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> My not-ready-for-16 work on CAST( ... ON DEFAULT ... ) involved making
> FuncExpr/IoCoerceExpr/ArrayCoerceExpr have a safe_mode flag, and that
> necessitates adding a reserror boolean to ExprEvalStep for subsequent steps
> to test if the error happened.

Why do you want it in ExprEvalStep ... couldn't it be in ExprState?
I can't see why you'd need more than one at a time during evaluation.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kirk Wolak 2023-02-23 19:05:33 Re: Proposal: %T Prompt parameter for psql for current time (like Oracle has)
Previous Message Kirk Wolak 2023-02-23 18:52:27 Re: Proposal: %T Prompt parameter for psql for current time (like Oracle has)