maria-discuss team mailing list archive

[Oleksandr Byelkin <sanja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi!

On 10.03.15 21:41, Justin Swanhart wrote:
> No,
>
> You SAY the UDF can support them, but you neglect to point to a 
> technical way how.
>
> If you want to return a row as an array, well, how do you add an item 
> to a row outside of the UDF, remove one?  How do you count the items 
> in the row?  How do you get an item by index?  If you want to use 
> internal Item_result, well, how do you access item functions without a 
> THD?  You can't get a THD in a UDF, except an opaque pointer to one, 
> unless you pull in half the server and it isn't really "legal" to do 
> so.  How do you pass an array to a stored routine, how does the 
> routine modify it, can routines return arrays or just UDF?  Row as an 
> array is a ludicrous hack.  You can't even pass row to other functions.
>
> If you want a new UDF interface that can do those things, use a 
> pluggable item function which I linked to the patch to. You absolutely 
> can't change an unversioned binary interface like the existing UDF 
> without risking server crash.
>
> So, if you want ARRAY to be returned by a UDF, you have to start with 
> a new UDF interface.  Again, pluggable item func are the right way to 
> do it.
It looks like you misunderstand me.

I do not want something with UDF at all, I just mentioned that 
internally there is something array-like and somebody who will do the 
task can be aware of it.

P.S.: But now I see that UDF interface should be changed due to problems 
you mentioned.