Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> You mean like PG_MODULE_MAGIC?
> Hey, how about that. Why doesn't that solve our problem here? > [ thinks ... ] I guess it's because there's no guarantee that the > function is installed on the SQL level with the signature that is > appropriate on the C level. Yeah. And it's more than just the function itself. For example, in the contrib/isn mess, the function definitions didn't change. The problem is the passbyval flag (or lack of it) on the type definition. I think we've speculated in the past about having ways of embedding per-function data into the .so libraries so that these sorts of things could be caught automatically. But it'd be a lot of work for rather limited reward. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers