| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Extension Templates S03E11 |
| Date: | 2013-12-05 02:20:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20131205022014.GY17272@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Peter Eisentraut (peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net) wrote:
> On 12/3/13, 9:20 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Another option, which I generally like better, is to have a new package
> > format for PGXN that contains the results of "make install",
> > more-or-less, synonymous to Debian source vs. .deb packages.
> >
> > Perhaps we could even have psql understand that format and be able to
> > install the extension via a backslash command instead of having an
> > external tool, but I think an external tool for dependency tracking and
> > downloading of necessary dependencies ala Debian would be better than
> > teaching psql to do that.
>
> How would that handle varying file system layouts on the backend?
This discussion is all about catalog-only extensions and therefore we
don't really care about anything filesystem related...
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-12-05 03:32:52 | Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-12-05 02:00:27 | Re: Performance optimization of btree binary search |