On 2013-06-04 16:24:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > I don't really care much about Oliver's usecase TBH, but I would very much > > welcome making it easier for application developers to package part of > > ther in-database application code as extensions without either requiring > > a selfcompiled postgres with a custom extension dir or them having have > > root access to the machine running postgres. > > Well, if you're installing an extension that includes C code, you're > going to need root access anyway to install the shlib (at least on > conservatively-configured machines). For pure-SQL extensions, Dimitri's > been pushing a different approach that needn't involve the filesystem at > all. We didn't get that finished in 9.3 but I think it's still on the > agenda for 9.4.
Yea, I know of Dimitri's work ;). But I really would like this to work for C extensions as well. For me personally its no problem at all that this wouldn't work on conservatively configured machines. Heck, I *don't* want it to work on production machines. But being able to configure a dev machine to allow it would be very helpful. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
