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 <http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/29bf5016835a2c2c23786f7cda347716c083d95f> would actually work here. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers