(Re-added hackers to Cc as this doesn't seem private, just accidentally
didn't reply-all?)
On 24 July 2017 at 23:50, Mat Arye wrote:
>
>
>
>> Issue 1: Preloading the right shared library.
>> When preloading libraries (either via local_preload_libraries, or
>> session_preload_libraries, shared_pr
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mat Arye writes:
> > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I'm not really sure why planner hooks would have anything to do with
> your
> >> exposed SQL API?
>
> > Sorry what I meant was i'd like to package different versions of
Mat Arye writes:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not really sure why planner hooks would have anything to do with your
>> exposed SQL API?
> Sorry what I meant was i'd like to package different versions of my
> extension -- both .sql and .c --
> and have the extension a
(adding -hackers back into thread, got dropped by my email client, sorry)
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mat Arye writes:
> > I tried looking in the contrib modules and didn't find many with lots of
> > planner hook usage.
>
> I'm not really sure why planner hooks would have
On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote:
> > (I
> > want to avoid having to keep backwards-compatibility for all functions in
> > future shared-libraries).
>
> Are you sure that's a good idea?
No :). But we have a lot of (most of)
On 22 Jul. 2017 04:19, "Mat Arye" wrote:
Hi All,
I am developing the TimescaleDB extension for postgres (
https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb) and have some questions about
versioning. First of all, I have to say that the versioning system on the
sql side is wonderful. It's really simple to
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote:
>> (I
>> want to avoid having to keep backwards-compatibility for all functions in
>> future shared-libraries).
> Are you sure that's a good idea? It seems like swimming upstream
> against the design. I mean, instead of cre
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote:
> (I
> want to avoid having to keep backwards-compatibility for all functions in
> future shared-libraries).
Are you sure that's a good idea? It seems like swimming upstream
against the design. I mean, instead of creating a dispatcher library
tha
On 07/21/2017 04:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am developing the TimescaleDB extension for postgres
> (https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb) and have some questions
> about versioning. First of all, I have to say that the versioning
> system on the sql side is wonderful. It's really
Hi All,
I am developing the TimescaleDB extension for postgres (
https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb) and have some questions about
versioning. First of all, I have to say that the versioning system on the
sql side is wonderful. It's really simple to write migrations etc.
However when thinki
10 matches
Mail list logo
