Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com> writes:
> On 10/19/15 7:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> IMO, we ought to get rid of the use of that representation for
>> composite-type variables and use the RECORD code paths for them,
> That also means there would only need to be changes to RECORD to allow
> CONSTANT, default, etc.
> Do you know offhand what the starting point for changing that would be?
> build_datatype()?
Well, definitely build_datatype would want to select PLPGSQL_TTYPE_REC not
PLPGSQL_TTYPE_ROW when seeing TYPTYPE_COMPOSITE. I suspect that's just a
small tip of a large iceberg, though.
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
