In view of the other patch submitted to support init/fini functions for
shared libraries, I'm inclined to change this one to depend on that;
in particular it seems like we could eliminate the necessity for users
to specify the correct setup-function names. Thoughts?
I think that would
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The attached patch adds support for loadable instrumentation plugins for
> procedural languages (as discussed at the anniversary summit). It also
> adds plugin support to the PL/pgSQL language handler.
In view of the other patch submitted to suppor
