| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |
| Date: | 2011-02-12 23:04:26 |
| Message-ID: | 3290389F-034D-4A7B-BFB6-606D92BA438A@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Feb 12, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I did think of another idea besides forbidding dash in extension names:
> what if we use double dash as the name/version separator, ie the naming
> conventions are like
> extension--version.control
> extension--version.sql
> extension--oldversion-newversion.sql
> Then we'd only have to forbid double dash in extension names, which
> seems unlikely to be a problem for anybody. (I think we might also have
> to forbid empty version names to make this bulletproof, but that doesn't
> bother me much either.)
+1 You might even consider mandating a double-dash between versions, so that they could have dashes:
extension--oldversion--newversion.sql
We don't have to worry about the length of the file name, do we?
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-12 23:12:43 | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2011-02-12 22:33:37 | Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw |