Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix
Date: 2024-05-13 23:27:53
Message-ID: 20240513232753.fgu7sn7lebk7jwlg@awork3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2024-05-13 19:11:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The mechanism that Andres describes for sourcing the name seems a bit
> overcomplex though. Why not just allow/require each extension to
> specify its name as a constant string? We could force the matter by
> redefining PG_MODULE_MAGIC as taking an argument:
> PG_MODULE_MAGIC("hstore");

Mostly because it seemed somewhat sad to require every extension to have
version-specific ifdefs around that, particularly because it's not hard for us
to infer.

I think there might be other use cases for the backend to provide "extension
scoped" information, FWIW. Even just providing the full path to the extension
library could be useful.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Julien Rouhaud 2024-05-13 23:28:03 Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix
Previous Message David Rowley 2024-05-13 23:24:53 Re: Why is parula failing?