Tom Lane wrote:
> My take is that the proposed SRF API includes a count field that the
> function may use *if it wants to* to store a termination condition.
> If not, fine: detect termination however you want. But the availability
> of the field simplifies one common coding pattern, without creating any
> noticeable overhead for functions that want to do it differently.
>
> If that wasn't what either of you meant, I'll skulk away quietly...
>
Right on target from my side ;-)
Joe