From: Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> [ raised eyebrow... ] I find it very hard to understand why that would
> be necessary, or even a good idea. Not least because there's no spare
> room there; you'd have to incur a substantial enlargement of the
> array to add another flag. But also, that would indeed lock down
> the value of the parallel-safety flag, and that seems like a fairly
> bad idea.
You're right, FmgrBuiltins is already fully packed (24 bytes on 64-bit
machines). Enlarging the frequently accessed fmgr_builtins array may wreak
unexpectedly large adverse effect on performance.
I wanted to check the parallel safety of functions, which various objects (data
type, index, trigger, etc.) come down to, in FunctionCallInvoke() and other few
places. But maybe we skip the check for built-in functions. That's a matter
of where we draw a line between where we check and where we don't.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
