Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Jul 16, 2010, at 2:27 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> If we continue with the approach I took, we should implement the suggestion
>> to create a new data type for this in 9.1. That would be more waterproof
>> than the changes I made, if we introduce new ways to call functions in the
>> future.
> The downside is that it might cause the approach used in the older releases
> to get less testing.
I hope we can get a better fix into the next 9.0 beta, so it will get
some field testing before any back-branch minor releases happen.
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
