On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 02:48:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes:
> >> Isn't this bogus?
>
> > No. Note the comment immediately above, as well as the header comment
> > for the function.
>
> OTOH, now that I think about it there's no reason whatever for that
> bizarre call convention. Let's split the function into two: one to
> expand an existing multixact, and one to make a multixact from two
> regular xids.
No problem ... shall I write a patch, or did you do it already?
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[@]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No es bueno caminar con un hombre muerto"
