On 22/05/2014 17:07, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> So, having seen that proof-of-concept, I'm wondering if we shouldn't make
>>> an effort to support contrib/uuid-ossp with a choice of UUID libraries
>>> underneath it. There is a non-OSSP set of UUID library functions
>>> available on Linux ("libuuid" from util-linux-ng). I don't know whether
>>> that's at all compatible with the BSD functions, but even if it's not,
>>> presumably a shim for it wouldn't be much larger than the BSD patch.
>
>> Well, if you want to do the work, I'm fine with that. But if you want
>> to just shoot uuid-ossp in the head, I'm fine with that, too. As
>> Peter says, perfectly reasonable alternatives are available.
>
> Well, *I* don't want to do that work. I was hoping to find a volunteer,
> but the silence has been notable. I think deprecation is the next step.
This sounds an easy enough task to try and submit a patch, if I'm able
to allocate enough time to work on it.
I have successfully compiled the extension on a NetBSD box using a
slightly modified version of Palle's patch. I have a few doubts though:
- should we keep the extension name? If not, what would be the plan?
- the patch also uses BSD's own md5 and sha1 implementations: for md5 I
should be able to use pg's own core version, but I'm not sure about
sha1, as it lives in pgcrypto. Any suggestion?
Cheers
--
Matteo Beccati
Development & Consulting - http://www.beccati.com/