Re: Extensions, this time with a patch

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, David E(dot) Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extensions, this time with a patch
Date: 2010-10-25 20:21:44
Message-ID: 1288037934-sup-2817@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Excerpts from Dimitri Fontaine's message of vie oct 22 16:43:56 -0300 2010:
> Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> > For information, when we talk about performance problem, please note
> > that on my workstation with a default setup (not that it's important
> > here) we're talking about 86,420 ms for a loop of 100
> > perform * from pg_extensions;

BTW it strikes me that it would be easier on the code that there were
just a couple of simple functions, one returning the list of installed
extensions and another one returning the list of installable
extensions. The rest of SRF functions needn't be implemented in C, you
could implement them in SQL instead by joining to pg_depend and whatnot.

Also, PFA a couple of minor fixes.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-A-bunch-of-minor-fixes.patch application/octet-stream 3.0 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2010-10-25 20:28:57 Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2010-10-25 20:17:16 Re: ask for review of MERGE