Re: Extensions vs. shared procedural language handler functions

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> I can imagine that someplace down the road we might want to allow
> multiple extensions to own the same SQL object; I know that RPMs can
> share ownership of files, for comparison.  But today is not that day.
[…]
> Anyone have a different answer?

What could be done is to have a common extension that installs the
functions, then both plperl and plperlu would require the common bits.
That's only practical when we have automatic dependency resolution at
install and remove times (it should not be hard to do, but well).

So for 9.1, I think you took the simplest path available.

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support