Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20582.1297619765@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr> writes: > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> I'm hesitant to have any substitutions that happen unconditionally, >> but we could add a control parameter like >> module_pathname = '$libdir/hstore' >> and then things would be pretty clean. > Ok. Maybe the simpler would be to make the current control variable a > static backend variable so that EXT_CONTROL(module_pathname) is easy to > find out from anywhere (I see you got rid of some direct usage of static > variables with recordDependencyOnCurrentExtension() already). I think it's better to keep it working as a textual substitution. That poses the least risk of breaking scripts that work today --- who's to say that somebody might not be relying on the substitution happening someplace else than CREATE FUNCTION's shlib string? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: