Andres Freund writes:
> On 2018-06-06 21:25:14 +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
>> The obvious case which is not one of those "pretty much all cases" is
>> where DirectFunctionCallN[Coll] is used - which turns out to be not all
>> that unusual.
> There the callsite just lives for just one call, I don'
Hi,
On 2018-06-06 21:25:14 +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> > "Andres" == Andres Freund writes:
>
> Andres> I think it's not unreasonable to think of it that way, but it's
> Andres> really not how it is used today. In pretty much all cases the
> Andres> collation is known and determined at t
> "Andres" == Andres Freund writes:
Andres> I think it's not unreasonable to think of it that way, but it's
Andres> really not how it is used today. In pretty much all cases the
Andres> collation is known and determined at the time fmgr_info() is
Andres> called (we also commonly reuse Fun
Hi,
On 2018-06-06 11:17:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > On 6/6/18 09:06, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> FmgrInfo really *is* call-site dependent, no? fn_extra, fn_mcxt, fn_expr
> >> all are. I think it's more useful to view the FmgrInfo /
> >> FunctionCallInfo data split as t
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 6/6/18 09:06, Andres Freund wrote:
>> FmgrInfo really *is* call-site dependent, no? fn_extra, fn_mcxt, fn_expr
>> all are. I think it's more useful to view the FmgrInfo /
>> FunctionCallInfo data split as the separation between per-callsite and
>> per-call data. And
On 6/6/18 09:06, Andres Freund wrote:
>> It's true that we often abuse fn_extra to hold data that's essentially
>> call-site-dependent, but I don't think that's a good reason to push
>> collation into FmgrInfo.
> FmgrInfo really *is* call-site dependent, no? fn_extra, fn_mcxt, fn_expr
> all are. I
Hi,
On 2018-06-06 01:01:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > In my understanding FunctionCallInfoData is basically per-call data,
> > whereas FmgrInfo is information about the function. It makes some sense
> > that ->context is in FunctionCallInfoData, after all it's used for
>
On 2018-06-05 17:11:17 -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 06/05/2018 04:57 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > But we don't really change the
> > collation of function invocations per-call.
>
> Is that true? (Not a rhetorical question; I'm unsure.)
Yes, it is at the moment.
> Is your argument that the
Andres Freund writes:
> In my understanding FunctionCallInfoData is basically per-call data,
> whereas FmgrInfo is information about the function. It makes some sense
> that ->context is in FunctionCallInfoData, after all it's used for
> per-row data like the trigger context. But we don't really
On 06/05/2018 04:57 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> But we don't really change the
> collation of function invocations per-call.
Is that true? (Not a rhetorical question; I'm unsure.)
Is your argument that the expression's collation is determined once
for each call /site/, and thereafter doesn't chan
Hi,
In my understanding FunctionCallInfoData is basically per-call data,
whereas FmgrInfo is information about the function. It makes some sense
that ->context is in FunctionCallInfoData, after all it's used for
per-row data like the trigger context. But we don't really change the
collation of f
11 matches
Mail list logo
