Hi, Olexandr Melnyk wrote:
> - by specifying an assembly filename and a fully qualified function name: > CREATE FUNCTION SUM(INT) RETURNS INT > AS 'Library1.dll:Namespace2.Class3.Function4' Using some kind of assembly qualified name for the method would fit better in the .NET world: ... AS 'Namespace2.Class3:Function4, Library1.dll[[Version=...], PublicKey=...]]' > 2) If we go with the approach 2 or 3, should all managed functions > exposed to PostgreSQL world be marked with some special attribute? For > example: The attribute is superfluous because the assemblies must be already protected anyway, i.e. by loading them from a configured and trusted location only. > Requiring an attribute would mean that functions can be used from SQL, > only if they were really intended for that. However, this would also > mean that to use a harmless function from standard namespaces (like > System.Math.Abs), one would need to make a wrapper. I believe it's OK to force having wrappers for methods not declared in an assembly located in the trusted area. Robert _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
