On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:38:46AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> My first approach - assuming that update_cached_tupdesc has good reason
> to make a copy, which I'm not convinced is the case - would be to simply
> make a per-query-context copy of the tupdesc to assign to rsi.setDesc in
> order to conform to the call protocol.
I see what you are coming at here, thanks for the input. I am not
really convinced that update_cached_tupdesc needs to do a new copy
either, but let's see what Tom has to say on the matter. That's his
feature and his code.
--
Michael