Re: The ultimate extension hook.

From: Daniel Wood <hexexpert(at)comcast(dot)net>
To: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: The ultimate extension hook.
Date: 2020-10-26 04:18:01
Message-ID: 127821416.37756.1603685881241@connect.xfinity.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 10/23/2020 9:31 AM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> wrote:
> [...]
> * useless with encrypted traffic
>
> So, +1 for such hooks.
>
> Regards,

Ultimately Postgresql is supposed to be extensible.
I don't see an API hook as being some crazy idea even if some may not like what I might want to use it for. It can be useful for a number of things.

- Dan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-10-26 04:19:48 Re: Supporting = operator in gin/gist_trgm_ops
Previous Message Julien Rouhaud 2020-10-26 04:10:12 Re: Supporting = operator in gin/gist_trgm_ops