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
