Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
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: 2011-02-14 17:37:07
Message-ID: m2bp2eh60s.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I don't really think that's a behavior we want to encourage. ISTM the
> cases that are going to be trouble are paths you failed to think about,
> and therefore what you want to do is look over the whole output set to
> see if there are any surprising paths...

Mmm, yes. Ok.

--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-02-14 18:10:49 Re: SSI bug?
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2011-02-14 17:26:16 Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage