Re: async notification patch for dblink

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Tom Lane wrote:
> [ thinks for awhile... ] Actually, it seems to me that the present
> patch's definition of the function would be very hard to work with.
> You would normally want to work with the events one at a time.
> There isn't much you could do with the array result except unnest() it,
> and I'm a bit worried that careless usage could result in multiple
> evaluation of the function and hence loss of events. I wonder whether
> it would be better to have the function return setof record. Which, not
> incidentally, would greatly simplify adding in those extra result
> fields.

OK, how's this look?

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=7koq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----