Re: DSO Terms Galore

On Jul 19, 2024, at 15:46, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:

> The lack of consistent terminology seems at least potentially confusing for
> readers.  My first reaction is that "shared library" is probably fine.

That’s the direction I was leaning, as well, but I thought I heard somewhere that the project used the term “module”
forthis feature specifically. That would be a bit nicer for the new PGXN Meta Spec revision I’m working on[1], where
thesethree different types of things could be usefully separated: 

* extensions: CREATE EXTENSION extensions
* modules: loadable modules for extensions, hooks, and workers (anything else?)
* apps: Programs and scripts like pg_top, pgAdmin, or pg_partman scripts[2]

Here the term “libraries” would be a little over-generic, and “share_libraries” longer than I'd like (these are JSON
objectkeys). 

Best,

David

[1]: https://github.com/pgxn/rfcs/pull/3
[2]: https://github.com/pgpartman/pg_partman/tree/master/bin/common