Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info
Дата
Msg-id 19993.1548697885@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info  (Paul Ramsey <pramsey@cleverelephant.ca>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 12:35 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Attached is an 0004 that makes a stab at providing some intelligence
>> for unnest() and the integer cases of generate_series().

> That looks awesome.

> I'm somewhat dubious about whole API.  It's basically -- if you have a
> problem and a PhD in PostgreSQL-ology, you can write some C code to
> fix it.  On the other hand, the status quo is that you may as well
> just forget about fixing it, which is clearly even worse.  And I don't
> really know how to do better.

Well, you need to be able to write a C extension :-(.  I kinda wish
that were not a requirement, but in practice I think the main audience
is people like PostGIS, who already cleared that bar.  I hope that
we'll soon have a bunch of examples, like those in the 0004 patch,
that people can look at to see how to do things in this area.  I see
no reason to believe it'll be all that much harder than anything
else extension authors have to do.

            regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgsql: Remove references to Majordomo
Следующее
От: Elvis Pranskevichus
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] Allow anonymous rowtypes in function return column definition