Re: [HACKERS] Doccumentation Patch for Create Function
| От | frankpit@pop.dn.net |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Doccumentation Patch for Create Function |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 37F64D6F.22B215C7@pop.dn.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Doccumentation Patch for Create Function (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > > Bernard Frankpitt <frankpit@pop.dn.net> wrote (a couple weeks ago): > > When I was altering the xfunc.sgml page I came across this: > > " " " > > > That's talking about builtin functions, ie functions implemented by > statically-linked routines in the standard backend. > > regards, tom lane Oh, That explains it. It didn't occur to me that people adding custom functionality to the backend wouldn't use a dynamically linked interface. In fact it occured to me that it might be a good idea to convert some of `poor relations' the stuff like gist, and perhaps rtrees to dynamically linked modules in /contrib. They might then provide better examples of how to develop and link major extensions into the backend in a relatively painless way. Also an exercise like that would really provide a good opportunity to define and document the backend code interfaces between the executor and access methods, and between access methods and the low-level database functionality (buffer management, tuple time-validation etc.). Once I finish my dissertation, I was sort of planning to start chipping away at some documentation for the code internals. To me, the extensibility features and open design of PostgreSQL are its most exciting features, and I think that a good set of documents on the internal functionality and interfaces would be rewarded in the long term by innovative features and unusual applications from developers in a wide variety of fields. Bernie
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: