Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Karol Trzcionka
Subject Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax
Date
Msg-id 51E08809.4090107@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax  (Karol Trzcionka <karlikt@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax
List pgsql-hackers
Next version:
- cleanup
- regression test
- fix issue reported by johto (invalid values in parallel transactions)
I would like more feedback and comments about the patch, as some parts
may be too hacky.
In particular, is it a problem that I update a pointer to planSlot? In
my patch, it points to tuple after all updates done between planner and
executor (in fact it is not planSlot right now). I don't know whether
the tuple could be deleted in the intervening time and if the pointer
doesn't point to "unreserved" memory (I mean - memory which may be
overwritten by something meanwhile).
Regards,
Karol

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Cédric Villemain
Date:
Subject: Re: Bugfix and new feature for PGXS
Next
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] In progress INSERT wrecks plans on table