On 3/17/17 18:35, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 03/17/2017 05:23 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I'm struggling to find a good way to share code between
>> bt_page_items(text, int4) and bt_page_items(bytea).
>> If we do it via the SQL route, as I had suggested, it makes the
>> extension non-relocatable, and it will also create a bit of a mess
>> during upgrades.
>> If doing it in C, it will be a bit tricky to pass the SRF context
>> around.  There is no "DirectFunctionCall within SRF context", AFAICT.
> Not sure what it has to do with DirectFunctionCall? You want to call the 
> bytea variant from the existing one? Wouldn't it be easier to simply 
> define a static function with the shared parts, and pass around the 
> fctx/fcinfo? Not quite pretty, but should work.

Perhaps what was added in
would actually work here.

Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to