Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Jul 16, 2010, at 2:27 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> If we continue with the approach I took, we should implement the suggestion to create a new data type for this in
9.1.That would be more waterproof than the changes I made, if we introduce new ways to call functions in the future.
> The downside is that it might cause the approach used in the older releases to get less testing.
I hope we can get a better fix into the next 9.0 beta, so it will get
some field testing before any back-branch minor releases happen.
regards, tom lane