Re: extension_control_path

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Sergey Muraviov <sergey(dot)k(dot)muraviov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: extension_control_path
Date: 2014-02-26 21:09:14
Message-ID: m2txbllgxx.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> I didn't suggest anywhere that the proposed patch changed the rules at
> all- instead I was trying to point out that by adding this functionality
> and *not* changing the way that lookup is done *is going to cause
> confusion*.

I don't see any confusion about dynamic library name resolving added
from the extension_control_path, I'm sorry. Simply because I don't
expect people to use the facility without a third party software
designed to fill-in the gap.

You're saying that the backend should fill the gap, I'm saying that it
should not. Or maybe within another patch entirely.

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2014-02-26 21:15:46 Re: extension_control_path
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2014-02-26 21:07:21 Re: GIN improvements part2: fast scan