On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:20, Robert Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
> It seems like pg_read_binary_file() is good to have regardless of
> whatever else we decide to do here. Should we pull that part out and
> commit it separately?
OK, I'll do that, but I have some questions:
#1 Should we add 'whole' versions of read functions in Dimitri's work?
#2 Should we allow additional directories? In the discussion,
no restriction seems to be a bad idea. But EXTENSION requires
to read PGSHARE or some system directories?
#2 can be added separately from the first change,
but I'd like to add #1 at the same time if required.
Or, if we're planning not to use pg_read_file functions in the
EXTENSION patch, we don't need #2 anyway.
--
Itagaki Takahiro
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
