Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1237626819.3953.550.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | contrib function naming, and upgrade issues (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 01:57 +0000, Andrew Gierth wrote: > Note that I'm talking here about the names of the C functions, not > the SQL names. > > The existing hstore has some very dubious choices of function names > (for non-static functions) in the C code; functions like each(), > delete(), fetchval(), defined(), tconvert(), etc. which all look to me > like prime candidates for name collisions and consequent hilarity. > > The patch I'm working on could include fixes for this; but there's an > obvious impact on anyone upgrading from an earlier version... is it > worth it? Perhaps you can have two sets of functions, yet just one .so? One with the old naming for compatibility, and a set of dehilarified function names for future use. Two .sql files, giving the user choice. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: