On 14/02/11 21:06, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2011-02-09 at 10:02 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote:
>> On 09/02/11 04:52, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>>> 2010/12/31 Jan Urbański <wulc...@wulczer.org>:
>>>> (continuing the flurry of patches)
>>>> Here's a patch that stops PL/Python from removing the function's
>>>> arguments from its globals dict after calling it. It's
>>>> an incremental patch on top of the plpython-refactor patch sent in
>>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4d135170.3080...@wulczer.org.
>>>> Git branch for this patch:
>>>> https://github.com/wulczer/postgres/tree/dont-remove-arguments
>>>> Apart from being useless, as the whole dict is unreffed and thus freed
>>>> in PLy_procedure_delete, removing args actively breaks things for
>>>> recursive invocation of the same function. The recursive callee after
>>>> returning will remove the args from globals, and subsequent access to
>>>> the arguments in the caller will cause a NameError (see new regression
>>>> test in patch).
>>> I've reviewed this. The patch is old enough to be rejected by patch
>>> command, but I manged to apply it by hand.
>>> It compiles clean. Added tests pass.
>>> I created fibonacci function similar to recursion_test in the patch
>>> and confirmed the recursion raises error on 9.0 but not on 9.1.
>>> Doc is not with the patch since this change is to remove unnecessary
>>> optimization internally.
>>> "Ready for Committer"
>> Thanks,
>> patch merged with HEAD attached.
> Curiously, without the patch the recursion_test(4) call fails but
> recursion_test(5) passes.  Anyone know why?

Damn, I remember that bug and thought I fixed it. I think calls with
even numbers passed and calls with odd numbers failed... I'll try to see
if a merge error did not introduce that bug back.

> Btw., I get a KeyError, not a NameError as you say above.

Will look into that too.


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to