On Jul20, 2011, at 17:37 , Tom Lane wrote:
> Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> writes:
>> I'm fine with having pg_xml_init() palloc the state and pg_xml_done()
>> pfree it, but I'm kinda curious about why you prefer that over making it
>> the callers responsibility and letting callers use a stack-allocated
>> struct if they wish to.
>
> We could do it that way, but it would require exposing the struct
> definition to callers. As I have it coded ATM, the struct is an
> opaque typedef in xml.h and only known within xml.c, which decouples
> contrib/xml2 from any changes in it. Another point is that if we
> changed our minds and went over to a transaction cleanup hook,
> stack-allocated structs wouldn't work at all. Lastly, even if we
> did stack-allocate the control struct, the message buffer has to be
> palloc'd so it can be expanded at need.
You've convinced me, thanks for the detailed explanation!
>> Fair enough. Are you going to do that, or do you want me to produce an
>> updated patch? I can do that, but probably not before the weekend.
>
> No, I'm working on it, almost done already.
Cool, thanks!
best regards,
Florian Pflug