On 02/25/2017 12:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think it'd be better to leave DirectFunctionCallN alone and just invent
> a small number of CallerFInfoFunctionCallN support functions (maybe N=1
> and N=2 would be enough, at least for now).
>
>
See attached.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services