On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 11:11, Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2025-01-12 at 14:54 +1300, David Rowley wrote: > > I wonder if there's some other better way of doing this. Would it be > > worth having some function like ExecCopySlotMinimalTuple() that > > accepts an additional parameter so that the palloc allocates N more > > bytes at the end? Maybe it's worth hunting around to see if there's > > any other executor nodes that could benefit from that infrastructure. > > That would be convenient, but doesn't seem like a great separation of > responsibilities. Perhaps some API that separated the length > calculation, and accepted a caller-supplied buffer?
The trick would be to ensure ExecClearTuple() still works. You obviously don't want to try and pfree() something that isn't a pointer to a palloc'd chunk. I'm not sure what the best API is, but I do see there are other places that might benefit from something that allows this. The two usages of ExecCopySlotMinimalTuple() in nodeMemoize.c are candidates. David
