Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRAsQynRq2vG3kWQxcaDvO_PcHzsocbTuJy=w_G77W-btg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins
List pgsql-hackers
Hello

Updated version

I still not happy with plugin_info - it is only per plugin now and should be per plugin and per function.

Regards

Pavel


2014/1/12 Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>



2014/1/12 Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to>
On 1/12/14, 5:33 PM, I wrote:
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?

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.

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


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Compiling extensions on Windows
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Standalone synchronous master