On 3/17/17 18:35, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 03/17/2017 05:23 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I'm struggling to find a good way to share code between
>> bt_page_items(text, int4) and bt_page_items(bytea).
>>
>> If we do it via the SQL route, as I had suggested, it makes the
>> extension non-relocatable, and it will also create a bit of a mess
>> during upgrades.
>>
>> If doing it in C, it will be a bit tricky to pass the SRF context
>> around. There is no "DirectFunctionCall within SRF context", AFAICT.
>
> Not sure what it has to do with DirectFunctionCall? You want to call the
> bytea variant from the existing one? Wouldn't it be easier to simply
> define a static function with the shared parts, and pass around the
> fctx/fcinfo? Not quite pretty, but should work.
Perhaps what was added in
<http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/29bf5016835a2c2c23786f7cda347716c083d95f>
would actually work here.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
