From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chris(dot)kings-lynne(at)calorieking(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules |
Date: | 2006-06-02 02:39:20 |
Message-ID: | 447FA4D8.7030303@calorieking.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
>> For instance, I'd like to 'enable slony support' if the slony shared
>> library is present. PPA's slony support automatically executes the .sql
>> files, so all I need to know is if the .so is there.
>
> I really think this is backwards: you should be looking for the .sql
> files. Every module will have a .sql file, not every one will need a
> .so file. See followup thread in -hackers where we're trying to hash
> out design details.
Not in this case.
Basically Slony has the concept of installing a node into a server. You
can have multiple ones of them - different schemas. So, I'd like to be
able to detect that the .so is there, and then offer an "install node"
feature where WE execute the SQL on their behalf, with all the
complicated string substitions already done.
The trick is that Slony currently requires you to use a command line
tool to execute these scripts for you.
At the moment, people have to indicate in our config while that Slony is
available, and also point us to where the Slony SQL scripts are located.
We do the rest.
It's not too important, but it's just an idea.
Chris
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-02 02:49:30 | Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-06-02 02:35:31 | Re: 'CVS-Unknown' buildfarm failures? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-02 02:49:30 | Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-02 02:27:39 | Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules |