Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Filip Rembiałkowski escribió:
>> 2009/10/6 Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
>>
>>> Are we looking down the wrong end of the telescope here? What if we had
>>> something more like the "C" binding for functions:
>>>
>>> CREATE FUNCTION foo(int,text,int) AS 'MyModule::internal_foo' LANGUAGE
>>> plperl;
>>> If you want inter-function calls you use internal_foo.
>>>
>> this really would be a great feature for many plperl users.
>> ( I'm not sure how it breaks current PL model in postgres)
>
> This would be a pain for dumps, because the user would have to install
> the modules separately. Maybe we could have a different language (say
> plperl2 for lack of a better name) that could work this way; if you
> really wanted to do this, you could.
I was assuming it would be smart enough to issue a "use MyModule" itself
(the same way the C library does). As far as pg_dump is concerned it
probably needs to be taught how to bundle external files - custom
tsearch dictionaries get left behind too.
It almost certainly would need to be call plperlmod or some such of
course - taking backwards compatibility away will just mean you have
loads of perl hackers chasing after you with sharpened onions.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
