Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> You mean like PG_MODULE_MAGIC?
> Hey, how about that. Why doesn't that solve our problem here?
> [ thinks ... ] I guess it's because there's no guarantee that the
> function is installed on the SQL level with the signature that is
> appropriate on the C level.
Yeah. And it's more than just the function itself. For example,
in the contrib/isn mess, the function definitions didn't change.
The problem is the passbyval flag (or lack of it) on the type
definition.
I think we've speculated in the past about having ways of embedding
per-function data into the .so libraries so that these sorts of
things could be caught automatically. But it'd be a lot of work
for rather limited reward.
regards, tom lane