From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: rmgr hooks (v2) |
Date: | 2009-01-21 15:34:00 |
Message-ID: | 1232552040.2327.496.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 14:28 +0000, Greg Stark wrote:
> The only advantage that remains, I think, is the real-world concern
> that you can have proprietary plugins
How exactly is this plugin more likely to result in a proprietary plugin
than all of the other plugin types we have? Because I suggest it??
I find it quite amazing that anybody would think I proposed a patch
whose "only advantage" lay in commercial exploitation, implying that I
intend that. But at least you had the courage to write it, allowing me
to answer, so actually I'll say thank you for raising that point:
** I have no plans for selling software that has been enabled by this
patch. **
The plugin approach was suggested because it brings together so many use
cases in one and adds missing robustness to a case where we already have
extensibility. Extensibility is about doing things for specific
implementations *without* needing to patch Postgres, not just allowing
external projects to exist alongside.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-01-21 15:44:15 | Re: Pluggable Indexes |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2009-01-21 15:12:36 | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |