From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: lo_create(oid, bytea) breaks every extant release of libpq |
Date: | 2014-06-12 14:56:04 |
Message-ID: | 20140612145604.GK18688@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> >> lo_new() or lo_make()? An earlier draft of the patch that added
> >> lo_create(oid, bytea) had a similar function named make_lo().
>
> It appears that lo_make() has a small plurality, but before we lock
> that name in, there was one other idea that occurred to me: the
> underlying C function is currently named lo_create_bytea(), and
> that seems like not an awful choice for the SQL name either.
>
> Any other votes out there?
I was also going to suggest lo_create_bytea(). Another similar
possibility would be lo_from_bytea() -- or, since we have overloading
(and we can actually use it in this case without breaking libpq), we
could just have lo_from(oid, bytea).
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-06-12 15:08:35 | Re: Shared memory changes in 9.4? |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-06-12 14:50:07 | Re: lo_create(oid, bytea) breaks every extant release of libpq |