Re: CREATE MODULE (was: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function language names)

From: Mark Hollomon <mhh(at)mindspring(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: CREATE MODULE (was: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function language names)
Date: 2000-11-14 01:33:54
Message-ID: 00111320335400.12247@jupiter
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Saturday 11 November 2000 20:30, Tom Lane wrote:
> Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>
> > Might even be able to implement a 'CREATE MODULE' which loads an
> > object, enquires about functions in the module, and creates function
> > entries based on information returned from pg_fmgr_info...
>
> That could work ... something to think about for the future, anyway.

I proposed this some time ago, even wrote up a semiformal proposal.
I was told at the time it was a bad idea.

The only objection I remember of the top of my head had to do with set-uid.

I apporached the other way. LOAD MODULE would call a well defined
entry point which could then use SPI or some other facility to create
whatever. I saw it as a way to distribute types and even whole applications.

--
Mark Hollomon

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-11-14 01:45:42 Re: Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting support
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-11-14 01:16:42 Re: Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting support