Re: [HACKERS] pstrdup(TextDatumGetCString(foo)) ?

[Tom Lane]

Chapman Flack  writes:
> I am encountering, here and there, an idiom like
>   pstrdup(TextDatumGetCString(foo))

> or a pre-8.4 version,

>   pstrdup(DatumGetCString(DirectFunctionCall1(textout, foo)))

> It's leading me to question my sanity because it appears to me
> that both text_to_cstring (underlying TextDatumGetCString) and
> textout already return a string palloc'd in the current context,
> and that pstrdup (without any change of context) can't be accomplishing
> anything. I'm probably missing something crucial, but what?

No, you're right: pstrdup in that context is a useless waste of cycles and
memory.

A quick grep in the current PG sources shows me only two occurrences of
the former, both in the same function and both doubtless introduced by
the same misinformed author.  I find no occurrences of the latter.

regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] pstrdup(TextDatumGetCString(foo)) ?

[Chapman Flack]

I am encountering, here and there, an idiom like

  pstrdup(TextDatumGetCString(foo))

or a pre-8.4 version,

  pstrdup(DatumGetCString(DirectFunctionCall1(textout, foo)))

It's leading me to question my sanity because it appears to me
that both text_to_cstring (underlying TextDatumGetCString) and
textout already return a string palloc'd in the current context,
and that pstrdup (without any change of context) can't be accomplishing
anything. I'm probably missing something crucial, but what?

-Chap


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers