On 1/12/17 10:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah, I'm not terribly for the extension idea. Robert cited the precedent of contrib/tsearch2, but I think the history of that is a good argument against this: tsearch2 is still there 9 years later and there's no indication that we'll ever get rid of it. We can let things rot indefinitely in core too. If we do ever agree to get rid of the aliases, stripping them out of pg_proc.h will not be any harder than removing a contrib directory would be.
Is there any burden to carrying tsearch2 around? Have we formally marked it as deprecated?
The way I see it, either one person can spend an hour or whatever creating an extension once, or every postgres install that's using any of these functions now has yet another hurdle to upgrading.
If PGXN was better supported by the community maybe the answer would be to just throw an extension up there. But that's certainly not the case.
-- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com 855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
