| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Time to drop old-style (V0) functions? |
| Date: | 2016-12-20 13:15:07 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoagnrpbM2Pqke2tRs7RfU6chSe5+C_HLxfAROyaAxO=mg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 3:11 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I think a more efficient variant would make the function signature look
> something like:
>
> Datum /* directly returned argument */
> pgfunc(
> /* extra information about function call */
> FunctionCallInfo *fcinfo,
> /* bitmap of NULL arguments */
> uint64_t nulls,
> /* first argument */
> Datum arg0,
> /* second argument */
> Datum arg1,
> /* returned NULL */
> bool *isnull
> );
Yeah, that's kind of nice. I like the uint64 for nulls, although
FUNC_MAX_ARGS > 64 by default and certainly can be configured that
way. It wouldn't be a problem for any common cases, of course.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-12-20 13:19:43 | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-12-20 13:10:29 | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |