Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> John Gray wrote:
>> Does this sound completely crazy?
> Not crazy at all. I asked the same question a few days ago:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-08/msg01914.php
I've been thinking more about this, and wondering if we should not
only make the tupdesc available but rely more heavily on it than we
do. Most of the C-coded functions do fairly substantial pushups to
construct tupdescs that are just going to duplicate what
nodeFunctionscan already has in its back pocket. They could save some
time by just picking that up and using it.
On the other hand, your experience yesterday with debugging a mismatched
function declaration suggests that it's still a good idea to make the
functions build the tupdesc they think they are returning.
regards, tom lane