Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> In any case, "java" has not been put forward as one of the template
>> entries, and as long as we don't accept a template for it, we have
>> not made the situation any worse.
> Hmm, Thomas Hallgren sent in a template using "java" as name and you
> answered "OK", so we're already there if it's already committed.
Oh, I hadn't noticed. That seems like rather a bad idea --- shouldn't
it be "pljava"? ("javaU" isn't going to work either, because of
case_translate_language_name.)
>> Yes, I am assuming that, and I challenge you to supply examples of
>> PLs that won't require at least a recompile before there's any hope
>> of their working on 8.1.
> There is no hope of that, but a mere recompilation does not change the
> validator or the schema or any other property that may be under
> consideration. The current code will force a *version* upgrade of all
> PLs with every PostgreSQL upgrade. I need to download new code and
> deal with it. That is currently not required.
Really? See the oidvector changes. I think that will force at least
minor source changes on every PL. Now there may be people out there who
will prefer making a few small changes by hand to downloading a new
version ... but they can probably manage throwing in a stub validator
function too.
regards, tom lane
