Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Any objections to me committing this?
>>
>> Might wanna fix this first:
>>
>> +PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1(ssl_veresion);
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Wow. It works remarkably well without fixing that, but I'll admit
> that does seem lucky.
Well, it's got no arguments, which is the main thing that works
differently in call protocol V1. I think you'd find that the
PG_RETURN_NULL case doesn't really work though ...
regards, tom lane