Andres Freund writes:
> On 2019-02-05 22:53:37 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Isn't this putting much more than needed in the stack? Seems like we
>> could just allocate tupdesc->natts members dynamically. Not sure if we
>> care: it's about 12 kB; maybe considering palloc overhead, using the
>>
On 2019-02-05 22:53:37 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Feb-01, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c b/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c
> > index de0d0723b71..8724022df54 100644
> > --- a/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c
> > +++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c
> > @@ -
On 2019-Feb-01, Andres Freund wrote:
> diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c b/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c
> index de0d0723b71..8724022df54 100644
> --- a/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c
> +++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/json.c
> @@ -1755,6 +1755,8 @@ composite_to_json(Datum composite, StringInfo re
> On 2 Feb 2019, at 00:21, Andres Freund wrote:
> In https://postgr.es/m/20190201162404.onngi77f26baem4g%40alap3.anarazel.de
> I noticed that composite_to_json() deforms column-by-column. Given that
> it always processes all columns, that seems quite the waste of resources.
>
> In some quick'n d
