2013/6/6 Robert Haas <[email protected]>: > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Kohei KaiGai <[email protected]> wrote: >> Also, I don't think ExecNodeExtender is not a good naming, because it >> is a bit long and >> abbreviation (ENE?) is hard to imagine the feature. Please give this >> feature a cool and >> well understandable name. > > I agree that "Extender" doesn't sound right. "Extension" would > probably be the right part of speech, but that has multiple meanings > that might confuse the issue. (Does CREATE EXTENSION take the > relation extension lock? And don't forget PostgreSQL extensions to > the SQL standard!) > > I'm wondering if we ought to use something like "Custom" instead, so > that we'd end up with ExecInitCustom(), ExecCustom(), ExecEndCustom(). > I think that would make it more clear to the casual reader that this > is a hook for user-defined code. > > Other bike-shedding? > Thanks for your suggestion. I also prefer the naming with "Custom" and relevant function names, much rather than "Extender". -- KaiGai Kohei <[email protected]>
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
