Re: [PATCH] contrib/seg: Fix PG_GETARG_SEG_P definition

Hi, On 2019-11-04 11:30:23 +, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > Tom Lane writes: > > > ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes: > >> I just noticed that when contrib/seg was converted to V1 calling > >> convention (commit 389bb2818f4), the PG_GETARG_SEG_P() macro

Re: [PATCH] contrib/seg: Fix PG_GETARG_SEG_P definition

Tom Lane writes: > ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes: >> I just noticed that when contrib/seg was converted to V1 calling >> convention (commit 389bb2818f4), the PG_GETARG_SEG_P() macro got defined >> in terms of PG_GETARG_POINTER(). But it itself calls DatumGe

Re: [PATCH] contrib/seg: Fix PG_GETARG_SEG_P definition

ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes: > I just noticed that when contrib/seg was converted to V1 calling > convention (commit 389bb2818f4), the PG_GETARG_SEG_P() macro got defined > in terms of PG_GETARG_POINTER(). But it itself calls DatumGetPointer(), > so shouldn