Re: RFC: ExecNodeExtender

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
> Also, I don't think ExecNodeExtender is not a good naming, because it
> is a bit long and
> abbreviation (ENE?) is hard to imagine the feature. Please give this
> feature a cool and
> well understandable name.

I agree that "Extender" doesn't sound right. "Extension" would
probably be the right part of speech, but that has multiple meanings
that might confuse the issue. (Does CREATE EXTENSION take the
relation extension lock? And don't forget PostgreSQL extensions to
the SQL standard!)

I'm wondering if we ought to use something like "Custom" instead, so
that we'd end up with ExecInitCustom(), ExecCustom(), ExecEndCustom().
I think that would make it more clear to the casual reader that this
is a hook for user-defined code.

Other bike-shedding?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company