Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 27467.1232078292@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes: > As I mentioned in my other email, this is mainly for PostGIS, but it can > certainly apply to other modules. Is this what we would recommend as an > approach for these kinds of modules? I feel like that would give > -hackers, or perhaps the PostGIS people, some heartburn, but maybe I'm > wrong? If you have an idle evening you might want to peruse all the past threads about developing better support for modules. This is clearly an area where we need to improve, and it's also clear that no quick hack is going to make it significantly better (in fact, it might make things worse by creating extra compatibility issues when we do get around to implementing a real solution). The main argument against sticking stuff into pg_catalog is that pg_dump will think it's a built-in and not dump it. In some respects that could be a plus, but for the most part it's a headache. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: