Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Interesting -- I missed that patch, but it seems like a better approach.
> Are you already reviewing Pavel's patch, or is it something I could take
> a look at?
The main objection I have is that I don't think changing the definition
of pg_proc.proargmodes is a good idea --- that will break some
nontrivial amount of client-side code in order to support a distinction
that seems unimportant. IMHO anyway. Feel free to take a whack at it.
regards, tom lane
