| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Soroosh Sardari <soroosh(dot)sardari(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Memory deallocation after calling cast function |
| Date: | 2014-06-17 15:42:41 |
| Message-ID: | 20140617154241.GD6836@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-06-17 21:09:25 +0530, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> At 2014-06-17 11:32:37 -0400, bruce(at)momjian(dot)us wrote:
> >
> > > SRFs in the SELECT targetlist tend to leak memory; this is not easily
> > > fixable, and nobody is likely to try hard considering the feature's on
> > > the edge of deprecation anyhow.
> >
> > Uh, what is replacing SRFs? CTEs?
>
> I don't think Tom was referring to SRFs in general, only putting them
> directly into the targetlist of a SELECT.
And the primary reason for using SRFs in the targetlist has gone away
due to LATERAL. It's now possible to pass data from tables to a SRF,
that previously wasn't possibly unless you'd used a SRF in the targetlist.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-06-17 15:48:10 | Re: Minmax indexes |
| Previous Message | Abhijit Menon-Sen | 2014-06-17 15:39:25 | Re: Memory deallocation after calling cast function |