Hi, > But for an extension stated as a pack of related UDFs and support code > , in don't believe that an SPI approach can be used.
Why not? > I think that we are talking of two different things: > > 1) Plug-ins: SPI candidate with tight relation to core central functions. > 2) Extensions: Addons of UDF sets with minimal core compromise that > must to be part of database itself. > > Plugins can be database configuration components , on the other hand > Extensions must to be database's objects. I don't see a clear distinction here. Fulltext indexes are also 'database objects' in a way, yet they are implemented as User Defined Functions (UDFs). > If someone create a database and define a view that use and UDF ; then > create a backup and send to another place; > all need components to maintain that view operative must to be in the > backup as any other database object. Yes. For CREATE ALIAS ... AS ..., the source code of the function is actually stored in the database. Currently there is no way to create a function using the bytecode (store the bytecode in the database). This feature could be added. I will add a feature request for: "User defined functions: allow to store the bytecode (of just the class, or the jar file of the extension) in the database." Regards, Thomas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
