From: | "Nikolay Samokhvalov" <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: --enable-xml instead of --with-libxml? |
Date: | 2007-02-22 08:32:56 |
Message-ID: | e431ff4c0702220032i72e4052esbdf7bb3ffa7b4d7d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On 2/21/07, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> I think it would be better that leaving --with-libxml out (i.e.
> compiling without libxml2 support) would only disable those parts in XML
> functionality that require libxml2 for their implementation; the rest of
> the stuff should be compiled in regardless of the setting.
>
> Is this not what is done currently?
>
The thing is that some functions of "XML support" are based on
libxml2, some are not. libxml2 contains useful routines to deal with
XML data. Now we have: XMLELEMENT uses such routines and XMLPI
doesn't. Actually, all SQL/XML publishing function could be
implemented w/o libxml2 -- but it's more convenient to use those
routines in some cases... And there is no guarantee that functions
that don't currently use libxml2 will not use them in future.
What I want to propose is just simplification -- consider all XML
stuff as one package, including XML type, SQL/XML publishing, XPath
funcs, additional publishing functions recently added by Peter (btw,
who knows -- maybe libxml2 will help to improve them somehow in
future?), etc.
--
Best regards,
Nikolay
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD | 2007-02-22 08:35:45 | Re: autovacuum next steps, take 2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-22 08:32:33 | Re: SCMS question |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-02-22 10:29:22 | Re: --enable-xml instead of --with-libxml? |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-02-22 08:32:00 | [test] |