Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
The fix is fairly small (see attached) although I need to check with
some perlguts guru to see if I need to decrement a refcounter here or
there.
Slightly simpler patch attached (and tested).
Thanks. Committed.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers ma
At 2009-09-12 13:17:50 -0400, and...@dunslane.net wrote:
>
> I have just noticed, somewhat to my chagrin, that while in a plperl
> function that returns an array type you can return a perl arrayref,
> like this:
>
>return [qw(a b c)];
>
> if the function returns a setof an array type you cannot
Tom Lane wrote:
Nobody has complained about it over the years, so I wonder if it should
be backpatched. It wouldn't change any working behaviour, just remove
the non-working property of some documented behaviour.
AFAICT it just fails, so backpatching seems like a bug fix not a
behaviora
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> The fix is fairly small (see attached) although I need to check with
> some perlguts guru to see if I need to decrement a refcounter here or there.
The array_ret variable seems a bit unnecessary, and declared well
outside the appropriate scope if it is necessary.
> Nobo
I have just noticed, somewhat to my chagrin, that while in a plperl
function that returns an array type you can return a perl arrayref, like
this:
return [qw(a b c)];
if the function returns a setof an array type you cannot do this:
return_next [qw(a b c)];
Now the plperl docs say:
