Re: [HACKERS] tuplesort_gettuple_common() and *should_free argument

Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
> It means "another call to tuplesort_gettupleslot", but I believe that
> it would be safer (more future-proof) to actually specify "the slot
> contents may be invalidated by any subsequent manipulation of the
> tuplesort's state" instead.

WFM.

>> There are several other uses of "call here", both in this patch and
>> pre-existing in tuplesort.c, that I find equally vague and unsatisfactory.
>> Let's try to improve that.

> Should I write a patch along those lines?

Please.  You might want to hit the existing ones with a separate patch,
but it doesn't much matter; I'd be just as happy with a patch that did
both things.
        regards, tom lane