Re: Python setof patch

Michael Fuhr wrote:

>On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
>>Aside from minor problems like being broken and undocumented, there is a
>>more serious question here: is this even the functionality we want?
>>
>>
>
>I'd rather see something akin to PL/pgSQL's RETURN NEXT or PL/Perl's
>return_next.
>
>
>

Agreed. My rudimentary testing shows that plperl's shiny new return_next
functionality not only avoids memory blowup but has a 40% speed
improvement over the old 'return the lot at once' API.

cheers

andrew