On 30/01/13 22:23, Tom Lane wrote:
> BTW, I'm also wondering if it's really necessary for plpython/plpy_spi.c
> to be looking into spi_priv.h ...

As far as I can tell, it's not necessary, spi.h would be perfectly fine.

Cheers,
Jan

In response to

• plpgsql versus SPI plan abstraction at 2013-01-30 21:23:18 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Christopher Browne	Date: 2013-01-30 22:37:33
	Subject: Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2013-01-30 21:35:11
	Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option