Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net> writes:
> On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 12:46 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The feeling I had about it was that if we were adding
>> PROARGMODE_VARIADIC in 8.4 then there wasn't any very strong argument
>> not to add PROARGMODE_TABLE; any code looking at proargmodes is going
>> to need updates anyway.
> I missed the addition PROARGMODE_VARIADIC too.
> Has it already been added ?
> What is it supposed to do ?
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Zdenek Kotala||Date: 2008-07-29 19:19:03|
|Subject: Re: Python 2.5 vs the buildfarm|
|Previous:||From: Zdenek Kotala||Date: 2008-07-29 19:12:45|
|Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG