| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Extensions, this time with a patch |
| Date: | 2010-10-25 01:22:57 |
| Message-ID: | 25782.1287969777@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Yeah - what is the feasibility of cleaning up the things where there
>>> are naming inconsistencies right now?
>>
>> Easy. Heck, the only reason we didn't do it 2 years ago was that we
>> were waiting for extensions before bothering.
> We could rename the module name, directory, and documentation path,
> but could not rename .so files because pg_restore would fail to restore
> functions written in C because they contains previous name of .so files.
> The issue will be solved by the EXTENSION patch, but the feature cannot
> be used to upgrade to 9.1 from older versions, no?
Hmm, there seems to be some confusion here as to whether we are talking
about "move the source code around" or "change user-visible module names".
I'm distinctly not for the latter, but I'm not sure if that's what Josh
meant.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-10-25 01:34:33 | Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-10-25 01:20:58 | Re: WIP: extensible enums |