On 11/02/11 16:47, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Alex Hunsaker <bada...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 02:09, Jan Urbański <wulc...@wulczer.org> wrote: >> It seems a bit heavy handed to invalidate and remake the entire >> plpython function whenever we hit this case. I think we could get away >> with setting ->is_rowtype = 2 in PLy_procedure_valid() instead. I >> suppose it should be fairly rare case anyway so... *shrug*. > > This last comment might make me think that we're looking for a new > version of this patch, but the comment on the CommitFest application > says "looks good". So I'm not sure whether this should be marked > Waiting on Author or Ready for Committer, but the current status of > Needs Review looks wrong.
I'm not planning on writing a new version of the patch. AIUI Alex said, that there's a possible optimization to be done, but the gain is so small that it doesn't matter. Jan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers