Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Really? Do we intend applications to call it?
> > Uh, well, we never call it ourselves, so if we don't expect other
> > applications to call it, why is it there?
> If it's intended for apps to call, how was the patch initially accepted
> with no documentation?
Not sure. That's why its history needs to be researched.
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Volkan YAZICI||Date: 2005-10-16 19:30:29|
|Subject: Re: Will PQregisterThreadLock() be documented?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-10-16 17:52:29|
|Subject: Re: Will PQregisterThreadLock() be documented? |
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-10-16 18:26:05|
|Subject: Re: small typo|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-10-16 18:07:21|
|Subject: Re: small typo |