Re: The flinfo->fn_extra question, from me this time.

On 06/15/19 21:46, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 06/15/19 21:21, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yup. (Of course, you don't have to use the SRF_FIRSTCALL_INIT
>> infrastructure.)
>
> That had crossed my mind ... but it seems there's around 80 or 100
> lines of good stuff there that'd be a shame to duplicate. If only

I suppose that's only if I want to continue using SFRM_ValuePerCall mode.

SFRM_Materialize mode could remove a good deal of complexity currently
in PL/Java around managing memory contexts, SPI_connect, etc. through
multiple calls ... and I'd also have fn_extra all to myself.

Until now, I had assumed that SFRM_ValuePerCall mode might offer some
benefits, such as the possibility of pipelining certain queries and not
building up a whole tuplestore in advance.

But looking in the code, I'm getting the impression that those
benefits are only theoretical future ones, as ExecMakeTableFunctionResult
implements SFRM_ValuePerCall mode by ... repeatedly calling the function
to build up a whole tuplestore in advance.

Am I right about that? Are there other sites from which a SRF might be
called that I haven't found, where ValuePerCall mode might actually
support some form of pipelining? Are there actual cases where allowedModes
might not contain SFRM_Materialize?

Or is the ValuePerCall variant currently there just to support possible
future such cases, none of which exist at the moment?

Regards,
-Chap