Re: Proposal: new large object API

Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> writes:
>> Breaking the type_sanity test is not acceptable.  Put in a second C
>> function.

> Are you talking opr_sanity?

Sorry, yes, too little caffeine ...

> What is evil with a polymorphic function?

(1) It's creating a false match --- your proposed entry in the opr_sanity
results has nothing at all to do with what the test is looking for.

(2) Refactoring to have two separate C functions will make the code
clearer, and not noticeably longer.
        regards, tom lane