Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > Looks good, committed with a bit of further cleanup.
I had not actually paid attention to the non-regclass parts of this, and now that I look, I've got to say that it seems borderline insane to have chosen to implement regproc/regoper rather than regprocedure/regoperator. The types implemented here are incapable of dealing with overloaded names, which --- particularly in the operator case --- makes them close to useless. I don't think this code was ready to commit. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers