Re: rmgr hooks (v2)
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: rmgr hooks (v2) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1232555840.2327.529.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: rmgr hooks (v2) (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 16:07 +0000, Gregory Stark wrote: > > > The plugin approach was suggested because it brings together so many > use cases in one and adds missing robustness to a case where we > already have extensibility. Extensibility is about doing things for > specific implementations *without* needing to patch Postgres, not just > allowing external projects to exist alongside. > > I think a generic plugin architecture is *too* many use cases. That is > it's too flexible and doesn't make any promises at all of what its > intended to do. I agree. I don't see providing the plugin capability should prevent provision of further features in this area. Indeed, I see it as a way of encouraging people to write stuff for Postgres, which we then reel slowly back into core, if it is robust enough and general purpose enough. My model is PL/Proxy: the capability we will eventually gain in Core will be because we gave solution designers a free hand to invent and a free hand to overcome obstacles in months, not years. Solutions now, better solutions later. > I'm not sure though, your comments in the other email make me think > there might be more to the patch that I had the impression was there. > Will now go read the patch and see if I was mistaken. Thank you. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: