From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Finer Extension dependencies |
Date: | 2012-03-29 08:37:29 |
Message-ID: | 877gy3kdkm.fsf@hi-media-techno.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> So my question is why you cannot depend on ip4r in that case. If some
> version of the module introduces ipv6, then let's depend on that
> version. It doesn't explain why a string feature name is needed.
The only operator we have to compare version strings in PostgreSQL
extensions is string equality. That's because we don't need more, and
designing a version scheme policy would be far more work that any
benefit I could imagine. And as we didn't enforce version naming policy
in 9.1, it could be argued that it's too late, too.
When you say 'require = ip6r' you are depending on *any* version of the
extension that is providing it, whatever its version string. You don't
have to know that '1.05' < '1.06' < '1.1' and you don't have to know
that the first version with ipv6 support was called '1.06'.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey Velikoredchanin | 2012-03-29 08:57:38 | Re: Standbys, txid_current_snapshot, wraparound |
Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2012-03-29 08:28:19 | Re: Standbys, txid_current_snapshot, wraparound |