Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins
| От | Pavel Stehule |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFj8pRCAx4nZQxNiYaLPOpAkXrC1E3ACr4j-vVK38or4DuuEBg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins (Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to>) |
| Ответы |
Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
2014/1/12 Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to>
On 1/12/14, 5:33 PM, I wrote:Oh, I think I'm being stupid -- we'd only have to do what *if* we don't want to change the API? Then my vote is for breaking the API.On 1/9/14, 11:41 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:There are two basic questions:
b) will we support same API still - a reference on plugin_info in exec
state is a issue - described in patch.
Pardon my ignorance, but why does the plugin_info have to be in the
executor state? If we're going to change the API, can't we pass it
directly to the callback function?
yes. It is my vote too.
It is trouble - but support same API is really ugly - on second hand - there are only few plpgsql plugins - and every plugin needs recompilation for new mayor version and fixing will be easy.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: