Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> writes: > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: >>> At the very least, I would suggest that feature names are per-extension.
>> Yeah, I had about come to that conclusion too. A global namespace for >> them would be a mistake given lack of central coordination. > That's how I did it first, but Alvaro opposed to that because it allows > for more than one extension to provide for the same feature name. > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-03/msg01425.php Right, but the question that has to be considered is how often would that be intentional as opposed to an undesirable name collision. I think Hitoshi was right upthread that it will seldom if ever be the case that somebody is independently reimplementing somebody else's API, so the use-case for intentional substitution seems thin. 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
