Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
> I recoded the stuff as Tom recommended, leaving the non-pretty version
> function names as they used to be, inventing new pg_get_XXXX_ext
> functions for the extended stuff, and pushing the code down into
> pg_get_XXXX_worker functions when needed. We now need the additional
> prototype include patch from builtins.h.
Applied with some editorializing. In particular, I don't believe the
original did the right thing with (a - (b - c)).
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Sean Chittenden||Date: 2003-07-30 23:07:59|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Re: Why READ ONLY transactions?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2003-07-30 22:22:55|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Re: Why READ ONLY transactions? |