Andrew Gierth <and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes: > 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? I agree that this wasn't an amazingly good choice, but I think there's no real risk of name collisions because fmgr only searches for such names within the particular .so. As you say, renaming *will* break existing dumps. I'd be inclined to leave it alone, at least for now. I hope that someone will step up and implement a decent module system for us sometime soon, which might fix the upgrade problem for changes of this sort. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers