Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues
Date: 2009-03-22 21:05:01
Message-ID: 17539.1237755901@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> writes:
> He also worked out some OS level tools for module handling, but I  
> think I'd prefer to have another notion in between, the extension.

> The extension would be a new SQL object referring to zero, one or more  
> modules and one or more SQL scripts creating new SQL objects (schemas,  
> tables, views, tablespaces, functions, types, casts, operator classes  
> and families, etc, whatever SQL scripting we support now --- yes,  
> index am would be great too).

This seems drastically overengineered.  What do we need two levels of
objects for?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2009-03-22 21:15:27
Subject: Re: typedefs for indent
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-03-22 20:27:42
Subject: Re: typedefs for indent

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group