Re: Extensions, this time with a patch

From: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extensions, this time with a patch
Date: 2010-10-21 03:01:59
Message-ID: AANLkTin0H3g=3LeJQo0soKiXt+r-tZtuRgZeyW1erUuv@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:14 AM, David E. Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> wrote:
> Might I suggest instead a META.json file like PGXN requires?

I think JSON is also reasonable, but one of the problem to use JSON format is
we cannot apply the extension patch until JSON patch has been applied ;-)

BTW, does anyone needs JSON formatted configuration files for other purposes?
There might be some discussions in "Standby registration" or "Configuring
synchronous replication" threads. Module control files are so simple that
they don't always require JSON format, such as nested variable. But
configuration files for replication might be more complex. If needed,
it would be reasonable to introduce a JSON reader.

--
Itagaki Takahiro

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-10-21 03:11:22 Re: lazy snapshots?
Previous Message Greg Smith 2010-10-21 03:01:39 Re: max_wal_senders must die