Re: Last call for comments: fmgr rewrite [LONG]

> Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > No, because we aren't ever going to be dynamically allocating these
> > things; they'll be local variables in the calling function. 
> 
> Fair enough then. Although that being the case, I don't see the big deal
> about using a few more bytes of stack space which costs absolutely
> nothing, even though the binary compatibility is a small but still real
> advantage.

I like Tom's clean design better.  Flexibility for little payback
usually just messes up clarity of the code.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026