Thanks Tom.
Assuming the SRF had a parameter, would this be a correct approach
(considering the iterative model) to bail-out early?
if (SRF_IS_FIRSTCALL())
{
int i;
if (get_call_result_type(fcinfo, NULL, &funcctx->tuple_desc) !=
TYPEFUNC_COMPOSITE)
{
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
errmsg("Check if sql function definition returns SETOF
record")));
return;
}
if (PG_ARGISNULL(0))
{
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_NULL_VALUE_NOT_ALLOWED),
errmsg("Null value not allow for ...")));
return;
}
if((i = PG_GETARG_INT32(0)) != 'WHATEVER')
{
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
errmsg("Null value not allow for ...")));
return;
}
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 5:50 PM
To: Itai
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Crash on SRF execution
Itai <[email protected]> writes:
> I'm attempting to program a simple SRF function but it constantly crashes
(details and code below).
> Any idea why?
Looks like you're pallocing some stuff in the calling context (ie, a
short-lived context) during the first execution and expecting it to still be
there in later executions. You'd need to allocate those data structures in
the multi_call_memory_ctx instead.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
