| From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, nikolay(at)samokhvalov(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: allow installation of any contrib module |
| Date: | 2007-01-25 18:26:27 |
| Message-ID: | 45B8F653.1020505@sigaev.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Why is ltree still in contrib? What prevents it from being in core?
Nothing. But I don't see any advantage of placing it in core - it changes
nothing in SQL, API or feature. Moving tsearch2 into core allows to manage
configuration with nice SQL API, using SysCache, automatical rereading
dictionaries files etc.
IMHO, common problem for hstore/ltree/tsearch2 is a problem with public
namespace is dump/restore. Users usually dump the whole db and restore it in new
version. Even we make new version of contrib module with the same function, new
function/feature will not be accessible.
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Troy | 2007-01-25 18:27:27 | Re: Proposal: allow installation of any contrib module |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-01-25 18:25:58 | Re: Proposal: allow installation of any contrib module |