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

Re: libpq object hooks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks
Date: 2008-05-14 14:44:31
Message-ID: 19342.1210776271@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> It should be noted that while this feels slightly foreign, it isn't 
> hugely invasive, unlike the previous effort - it's only a few hundred 
> lines of new code.

> If we reject this, presumably the authors will have no alternative than 
> to offer libpqtypes as a patch to libpq.

No, they could revise their patch to be more stylistically in keeping
with libpq.  I haven't looked at the current version of the patch yet,
but the early versions seemed quite overengineered to me, so your
criticism didn't surprise me.

>> Keep in mind that the original patch supported a single hook being
>> registered.

> Right, it was more the case insensitive part that bothered me.

I'm wondering why the hooks need names at all.  AFAICS all that
libpq needs to know about a hook is a callback function address
and a void * passthrough pointer.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-05-14 14:47:29
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-05-14 14:23:33
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-05-14 14:47:29
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-05-14 14:23:33
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks

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