| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jose Luis Tallon <jltallon(at)adv-solutions(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Implement uuid_version() |
| Date: | 2019-07-05 14:21:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20190705142126.GA23277@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Jul-05, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> (There is also precedent for redirecting the extension function to the
> internal one by changing the SQL-level function definition using CREATE
> OR REPLACE FUNCTION ... LANGUAGE INTERNAL. But that seems more
> complicated and would require a new extension version.
One issue with this approach is that it forces the internal function to
remain unchanged forever. That seems OK in this particular case.
> It could maybe be included if the extension version is changed for
> other reasons.)
Maybe add a comment in the control file (?) so that we remember to do it
then.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-07-05 14:22:11 | Re: Inconsistency between attname of index and attname of relation |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-07-05 14:15:45 | Re: Why vacuum_index_cleanup is needed for TOAST relations? |