On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:22, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
> This looks pretty good. But why are we bothering to keep $prolog at all any > more, if all we're going to pass it is &PL_sv_no all the time? Maybe we'll > have a use for it in the future, but right now we don't appear to unless I'm > missing something. I don't see any reason to keep it around. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
